PC gaming IS likely dead due to consoles but it's not because consoles are 'just too good.' Unfortunately, console users are like people with most technology. 'They' think their RAZR is as good as it gets.
The PS3 might be powerful right now but it's not upgradeable. Therefore, the PC will always be a 'better' gaming machine in terms of performance and graphics.
Unfortunately, there's no sign of any widely supported PC gaming environment being designed to fit neatly into a living room environment, to be played with wireless controllers from 20 feet away from a 50 inch plasma display.
People who argue about the PCs' performance are just not getting it. This is a point that Mac users should especially understand - that as long as the platform can get the job done, the use environment is at least as important as performance.
If you think world of warcraft is any reason to say that computer games are superior to console games, you need to stop playing that damn game and go experience the real world.
</end rant>
Sorry to be rude but I have a roommate who is basically addicted to that game and it is probably one of the biggest wastes of time I have ever seen in my life.
LOL, good comic... though I think they kinda made Steve look a bit strange and cross-eyed. \
.
Yeah I don't think we will see Halflife 2. It's kind of waste anyways I think most that liked this game (me being one of them" have already eithe played it on a PC or Console.
Even the new EA games just don't run very well. Only game I play on my Mac is WOW. That game runs well on just about anything.
It hasn't been until the most recent generation of consoles that networking has been a main feature. PCs (and macs) have a big head start in networking, but it's not going to be an advantage for long. Also, consider that Halo 3 sold 3.3 million copies in two weeks. Those kind of figures make Half Life's market seem pedestrian, and there are more Wii's than 360's to boot.
I like AppleInsider, but honestly, this comic is really, I'm not sure why AppleInsider is wasting time with this stuff. Drawing is nice, and I know it is not easy, but I'll stick to JoyOfTech.com for now.
Making a separate AppleInsider article about the comic is, well, weird too.
Vulgar, but not funny or witty, in my honest opinion.
I see AppleInsider is trying to "build value" by adding on additional content. The Leopard articles are good, and do build up value, but this type of mediocre, vaguely-related content only serves to dilute your value. I hope AppleInsider doesn't become a repository for mediocre comics and off-topic articles.
That's not really true. The last I saw numbers, which I think was the last thread someone mentioned consoles, "PC" games had about 20% of the game market, games for the other devices the remaining 80%. Among that "other devices" were split among the DS, PSP, Wii, 360, PS2 (yes, still) and PS3, so I'd say that PC games still make up a respectable share of the game market, maybe not beating all the competing devices, but possibly close to the top.
It hasn't been until the most recent generation of consoles that networking has been a main feature. PCs (and macs) have a big head start in networking, but it's not going to be an advantage for long. Also, consider that Halo 3 sold 3.3 million copies in two weeks.
3.3 million copies sold is some nice cheddar (about $200 million in revenue), but consider that World of Warcraft pulls down in excess of $1 billion in revenue EVERY YEAR. So this year's blockbuster console game is effectively dwarfed by the blockbuster PC/Mac game.
That's very impressive, and helps put the lie to the idea that PC gaming is dead. Some other big PC releases to watch for soon are Hellgate: London and StarCraft 2.
Edit: Oh, and Spore, of course. Though that one certainly is taking its sweet time being released.
Valve. Wit their whining... If they wanted to go Mac, they could.
But similarly, I'd like Apple to have a coherant gaming strategy. A mid-tower, an aquired software house like Blizzard (big subsriber base...) and...a more visable communicate approach to games on their webside.
Still, at the rate the casual gaming market is growingand the rate Mac sales are growing...they'll get there by default...
3.3 million copies sold is some nice cheddar (about $200 million in revenue), but consider that World of Warcraft pulls down in excess of $1 billion in revenue EVERY YEAR. So this year's blockbuster console game is effectively dwarfed by the blockbuster PC/Mac game.
That's very impressive, and helps put the lie to the idea that PC gaming is dead. Some other big PC releases to watch for soon are Hellgate: London and StarCraft 2.
I think the point should be made that the PC is it's own thing and not dying or dead as the doomsayers suggest. It's share of the market has gone down a little bit, but it's sharing the market with four consoles and two handhelds. Console games doing well doesn't mean that the PC titles are doing badly.
Quote:
Edit: Oh, and Spore, of course. Though that one certainly is taking its sweet time being released.
Spore has been announced for the home consoles too.
Unfortunately, we only ever hear bits and pieces of the arguments that these guys have. It's rarely black and white in any negotiation. While Valve probably did ask for a Million to begin the port, theres probably much more to it. I imagine it went something like:
Valve:
Your OS is incomplete. There is no "easy" way to port our heavily DirectX game to your platform. We need you to add these things to which have no equivalent in your Operating system.
"Hands a list of changes involving months of work and lots of recources"
Apple:
We have several other Game developers that have no problem porting there Software to our platform, or have only required us to make minor alterations. We see no need to make our software easier to port to.
Valve:
Fine. We'll need 1 Million Dollars to do the job you guys should already be doing.
Apple:
We'll pass.
Both probably have legitimate arguments, but both are also probably tight wads and unwilling to compromise.
Fine. We'll need 1 Million Dollars to do the job you guys should already be doing.
Apple:
We'll pass.
Both probably have legitimate arguments, but both are also probably tight wads and unwilling to compromise.
Valve has sold over 20 million games in retail, and there are 13 million Steam accounts. It is clear that Valve will rather not have a port at all than have someone plop out a half-assed one and then spend the rest of the year looking at reviews, magazine headlines and blogs saying
Half-Life 2 (for Mac) disappoints all.
It's their reputation and big franchises at stake here. So they'd definitely see to it that the port turned out well, if there was one.
Why would Valve tie up some among their best technical people to make a beautiful and fast-running port happen, when they could have no risk and keep those people working to make the next engine and the next games for their current audience which is vastly bigger? The personnel to do this kind of work does not appear out of thin air, and you can't just hire some new ones off the street and expect results. They need to be absorbed into the company's technical ecosystem, which takes time, which again could be used for more directly profitable pursuits.
Remember, Steam and the latest Source engine running on the Mac means all the mods would be on the Mac too. Other games using unmodified or lightly modified Source would be almost certain to appear on the Mac through Steam, since it would cost them next to nothing to accomplish at that point.
$1 million is peanuts for Steam and Source on the Mac. Valve has no reason to "compromise".
Just for comparison... how cheap do you think one could get permission to make an official sequel to one of last year's most successful and well-liked movies? HL2 received many "Game of the Year" awards.
Unfortunately, we only ever hear bits and pieces of the arguments that these guys have. It's rarely black and white in any negotiation. While Valve probably did ask for a Million to begin the port, theres probably much more to it. I imagine it went something like:
Valve:
Your OS is incomplete. There is no "easy" way to port our heavily DirectX game to your platform. We need you to add these things to which have no equivalent in your Operating system.
"Hands a list of changes involving months of work and lots of recources"
Apple:
We have several other Game developers that have no problem porting there Software to our platform, or have only required us to make minor alterations. We see no need to make our software easier to port to.
Valve:
Fine. We'll need 1 Million Dollars to do the job you guys should already be doing.
Exactly what about the OS should Apple be doing to make the porting job easier? Making a DX implementation or making a DX wrapper to translate the calls to something Apple does (OpenGL, etc.) is probably going to make Apple a target for a lawsuit.
3.3 million copies sold is some nice cheddar (about $200 million in revenue), but consider that World of Warcraft pulls down in excess of $1 billion in revenue EVERY YEAR. So this year's blockbuster console game is effectively dwarfed by the blockbuster PC/Mac game.
That's very impressive, and helps put the lie to the idea that PC gaming is dead. Some other big PC releases to watch for soon are Hellgate: London and StarCraft 2.
Edit: Oh, and Spore, of course. Though that one certainly is taking its sweet time being released.
I never doubted that PC gaming is a reasonably large market, but nonetheless it's very reasonable to expect future online games (like WoW) will be released for consoles. It seems like the console market is growing much faster than the PC game market, and in certain areas it definitely seems like the console market has taken over: the console is definitely the preferred format for shooter games like Halo, and this wasn't always the case.
I'm a bit confused, though, why there are people who are very defensive about PC gaming (not by any means pointing the finger). If the experience is the same (or close enough), does it really matter?
Comments
LOL, good comic... though I think they kinda made Steve look a bit strange and cross-eyed.
.
He is a bit strange.
PC gaming IS likely dead due to consoles but it's not because consoles are 'just too good.' Unfortunately, console users are like people with most technology. 'They' think their RAZR is as good as it gets.
The PS3 might be powerful right now but it's not upgradeable. Therefore, the PC will always be a 'better' gaming machine in terms of performance and graphics.
Unfortunately, there's no sign of any widely supported PC gaming environment being designed to fit neatly into a living room environment, to be played with wireless controllers from 20 feet away from a 50 inch plasma display.
People who argue about the PCs' performance are just not getting it. This is a point that Mac users should especially understand - that as long as the platform can get the job done, the use environment is at least as important as performance.
World of Warcraft
If you think world of warcraft is any reason to say that computer games are superior to console games, you need to stop playing that damn game and go experience the real world.
</end rant>
Sorry to be rude but I have a roommate who is basically addicted to that game and it is probably one of the biggest wastes of time I have ever seen in my life.
LOL, good comic... though I think they kinda made Steve look a bit strange and cross-eyed.
.
Yeah I don't think we will see Halflife 2. It's kind of waste anyways I think most that liked this game (me being one of them" have already eithe played it on a PC or Console.
Even the new EA games just don't run very well. Only game I play on my Mac is WOW. That game runs well on just about anything.
World of Warcraft
It hasn't been until the most recent generation of consoles that networking has been a main feature. PCs (and macs) have a big head start in networking, but it's not going to be an advantage for long. Also, consider that Halo 3 sold 3.3 million copies in two weeks. Those kind of figures make Half Life's market seem pedestrian, and there are more Wii's than 360's to boot.
Making a separate AppleInsider article about the comic is, well, weird too.
I see AppleInsider is trying to "build value" by adding on additional content. The Leopard articles are good, and do build up value, but this type of mediocre, vaguely-related content only serves to dilute your value. I hope AppleInsider doesn't become a repository for mediocre comics and off-topic articles.
Let's face it "PC" gaming is dead anyway.
That's not really true. The last I saw numbers, which I think was the last thread someone mentioned consoles, "PC" games had about 20% of the game market, games for the other devices the remaining 80%. Among that "other devices" were split among the DS, PSP, Wii, 360, PS2 (yes, still) and PS3, so I'd say that PC games still make up a respectable share of the game market, maybe not beating all the competing devices, but possibly close to the top.
It hasn't been until the most recent generation of consoles that networking has been a main feature. PCs (and macs) have a big head start in networking, but it's not going to be an advantage for long. Also, consider that Halo 3 sold 3.3 million copies in two weeks.
3.3 million copies sold is some nice cheddar (about $200 million in revenue), but consider that World of Warcraft pulls down in excess of $1 billion in revenue EVERY YEAR.
That's very impressive, and helps put the lie to the idea that PC gaming is dead. Some other big PC releases to watch for soon are Hellgate: London and StarCraft 2.
Edit: Oh, and Spore, of course. Though that one certainly is taking its sweet time being released.
.
It's just a comic strip.
Funny. I liked that. Comic shop owner from Simpsons side reference. There's probably a grain of truth in it.
I like that Appleinsider are adding value. As opposed to the past approach of half yearly updates.
Keep the comic strips coming. I liked it.
Lemon Bon Bon.
But similarly, I'd like Apple to have a coherant gaming strategy. A mid-tower, an aquired software house like Blizzard (big subsriber base...) and...a more visable communicate approach to games on their webside.
Still, at the rate the casual gaming market is growingand the rate Mac sales are growing...they'll get there by default...
Lemon Bon Bon.
3.3 million copies sold is some nice cheddar (about $200 million in revenue), but consider that World of Warcraft pulls down in excess of $1 billion in revenue EVERY YEAR.
That's very impressive, and helps put the lie to the idea that PC gaming is dead. Some other big PC releases to watch for soon are Hellgate: London and StarCraft 2.
I think the point should be made that the PC is it's own thing and not dying or dead as the doomsayers suggest. It's share of the market has gone down a little bit, but it's sharing the market with four consoles and two handhelds. Console games doing well doesn't mean that the PC titles are doing badly.
Edit: Oh, and Spore, of course. Though that one certainly is taking its sweet time being released.
Spore has been announced for the home consoles too.
Unfortunately, we only ever hear bits and pieces of the arguments that these guys have. It's rarely black and white in any negotiation. While Valve probably did ask for a Million to begin the port, theres probably much more to it. I imagine it went something like:
Valve:
Your OS is incomplete. There is no "easy" way to port our heavily DirectX game to your platform. We need you to add these things to which have no equivalent in your Operating system.
"Hands a list of changes involving months of work and lots of recources"
Apple:
We have several other Game developers that have no problem porting there Software to our platform, or have only required us to make minor alterations. We see no need to make our software easier to port to.
Valve:
Fine. We'll need 1 Million Dollars to do the job you guys should already be doing.
Apple:
We'll pass.
Both probably have legitimate arguments, but both are also probably tight wads and unwilling to compromise.
My sentiments exactly.
Valve:
Fine. We'll need 1 Million Dollars to do the job you guys should already be doing.
Apple:
We'll pass.
Both probably have legitimate arguments, but both are also probably tight wads and unwilling to compromise.
Valve has sold over 20 million games in retail, and there are 13 million Steam accounts. It is clear that Valve will rather not have a port at all than have someone plop out a half-assed one and then spend the rest of the year looking at reviews, magazine headlines and blogs saying
Half-Life 2 (for Mac) disappoints all.
It's their reputation and big franchises at stake here. So they'd definitely see to it that the port turned out well, if there was one.
Why would Valve tie up some among their best technical people to make a beautiful and fast-running port happen, when they could have no risk and keep those people working to make the next engine and the next games for their current audience which is vastly bigger? The personnel to do this kind of work does not appear out of thin air, and you can't just hire some new ones off the street and expect results. They need to be absorbed into the company's technical ecosystem, which takes time, which again could be used for more directly profitable pursuits.
Remember, Steam and the latest Source engine running on the Mac means all the mods would be on the Mac too. Other games using unmodified or lightly modified Source would be almost certain to appear on the Mac through Steam, since it would cost them next to nothing to accomplish at that point.
$1 million is peanuts for Steam and Source on the Mac. Valve has no reason to "compromise".
Just for comparison... how cheap do you think one could get permission to make an official sequel to one of last year's most successful and well-liked movies? HL2 received many "Game of the Year" awards.
Unfortunately, we only ever hear bits and pieces of the arguments that these guys have. It's rarely black and white in any negotiation. While Valve probably did ask for a Million to begin the port, theres probably much more to it. I imagine it went something like:
Valve:
Your OS is incomplete. There is no "easy" way to port our heavily DirectX game to your platform. We need you to add these things to which have no equivalent in your Operating system.
"Hands a list of changes involving months of work and lots of recources"
Apple:
We have several other Game developers that have no problem porting there Software to our platform, or have only required us to make minor alterations. We see no need to make our software easier to port to.
Valve:
Fine. We'll need 1 Million Dollars to do the job you guys should already be doing.
Exactly what about the OS should Apple be doing to make the porting job easier? Making a DX implementation or making a DX wrapper to translate the calls to something Apple does (OpenGL, etc.) is probably going to make Apple a target for a lawsuit.
3.3 million copies sold is some nice cheddar (about $200 million in revenue), but consider that World of Warcraft pulls down in excess of $1 billion in revenue EVERY YEAR.
That's very impressive, and helps put the lie to the idea that PC gaming is dead. Some other big PC releases to watch for soon are Hellgate: London and StarCraft 2.
Edit: Oh, and Spore, of course. Though that one certainly is taking its sweet time being released.
I never doubted that PC gaming is a reasonably large market, but nonetheless it's very reasonable to expect future online games (like WoW) will be released for consoles. It seems like the console market is growing much faster than the PC game market, and in certain areas it definitely seems like the console market has taken over: the console is definitely the preferred format for shooter games like Halo, and this wasn't always the case.
I'm a bit confused, though, why there are people who are very defensive about PC gaming (not by any means pointing the finger). If the experience is the same (or close enough), does it really matter?