Jump to content

What can we do to save PC gaming?

LewieP

By LewieP,
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

henofdoom

henofdoom

Posted
Posted
I'm sure valve would disagree, being the biggest FPS developer on the PC market. I don't disagree that PC companies are doing dual development, but to say its the demise of the PC FPS is silly.

Even Valve, who give the impression of being the most stable and financially secure of PC developers, made they're games multiformat long before this generation. Has Crysis given Crytek financial security long term as a PC only game? I think not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daveodeth

daveodeth

Posted
Posted
Even Valve, who give the impression of being the most stable and financially secure of PC developers, made they're games multiformat long before this generation. Has Crysis given Crytek financial security long term as a PC only game? I think not.

As a way to make extra money, it's not as if Valve were going to go bust if they didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Asura

Asura

Posted
Posted
The real kicker has been MS themselves, who in creating the XBox have transitioned many of PC gamings most loyal cohorts to being console consumers.

I actually agree with that. Anecdotal it may be, but I bought Live honestly expecting it to not be that good. I still remember when I got home with just the demo disc - me and my mates sat there "installing" it, then we went online with MotoGP. By that evening we had went back into town to buy Mechassault. Honestly I couldn't believe how good it was.

It totally scarred PC gaming for me. I couldn't go back to CS 1.6 (which was huge at the time) as, because it lacked voice chat, the people felt just like targets whereas Live's players felt more like real people.

Hate to be elitist but it needs to be said - Live was great then. It was entirely populated with people like us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
footle

footle

Posted
Posted
Starfox was a jerky 5fps headacheathon.

That's got nothing to do with the subject - it demonstrated that you didn't need thousands of pounds of arcade hardware; and was running on something far less powerful than a PC at the time. It also demonstrates that the argument that the PC was "innovating by bringing the arcade into the home" in a way that the console wasn't is fundamentally flawed - console developers were experimenting with 3D too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rayn

Rayn

Posted
Posted

One thing Doom did, though, was to introduce proper multiplayer gaming for the fortunate few working in networked offices. It took me a couple of years since its release 'til I first got myself a network adapter for my PC, but when I got that I was in (multiplayer) gaming heaven. Games like Doom, Warcraft 2, Worms and Command & Conquer all delivered something you didn't see in the arcades nor on home consoles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gwynster

Gwynster

Posted
Posted
Jesusface, which had the better graphics?

Oh, you're reframing the argument, then. Fair enough.

It's worth pointing out that in '94, the arcades were already deader than the PC ever will be, and nobody paid any attention to them except magazines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rayn

Rayn

Posted
Posted
Yes there were never any linked arcade cabinets.

I didn't say those didn't excist, but they were most certainly harder to come by (for me) than a PC network.

I'm not even going to bother arguing about this, 'cause to be frank, I don't give a shit.

I've always enjoyed playing games on all available platforms, even the PC (which is my most used gaming platform atm). I don't care what platform a game runs on, I care about how fun games are.

All platforms have their own pros and cons, and I wish developers would start to get better at making games that makes the best of each platform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
layten

layten

Posted
Posted
That's got nothing to do with the subject - it demonstrated that you didn't need thousands of pounds of arcade hardware; and was running on something far less powerful than a PC at the time. It also demonstrates that the argument that the PC was "innovating by bringing the arcade into the home" in a way that the console wasn't is fundamentally flawed - console developers were experimenting with 3D too.

Starfox was a jerky horrible on rails mess, hardly something bringing smooth arcade like 3D into the home. If anything it showed it was still the domain of expensive Arcades and the PC.

Anyway I remember playing fast paced space shooty games on the PC since 1990 (hi2u Wing Commander). While 1993 also brought us X-Wing, a Star Wars space action game which is still superior to the laughable home console games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MK-1601

MK-1601

Posted
Posted
That's got nothing to do with the subject - it demonstrated that you didn't need thousands of pounds of arcade hardware; and was running on something far less powerful than a PC at the time. It also demonstrates that the argument that the PC was "innovating by bringing the arcade into the home" in a way that the console wasn't is fundamentally flawed - console developers were experimenting with 3D too.

It demonstrated that you could barely do 3D on the then-current consoles if you had access to a custom DSP.

As with the Daytona example, it didn't mean much to the 99% of developers outside of the exclusive club who got to work on such esoteric hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stanley

Stanley

Posted
Posted
Starfox was a jerky horrible on rails mess, hardly something bringing smooth arcade like 3D into the home. If anything it showed it was still the domain of expensive Arcades and the PC.

Anyway I remember playing fast paced space shooty games on the PC since 1990 (hi2u Wing Commander). While 1993 also brought us X-Wing, a Star Wars space action game which is still superior to the laughable home console games.

I think you're a little bit right and a little bit wrong there. I worked in games shop at that time, and we received a top-end PC with which I installed X-Wing to show it off to the customers. It was a machine I could only dream of owning, being far too out of reach budget wise. Then came Star Fox which I thought was jaw dropping. It may not have been as impressive as X-Wing but in a way it was more so, because it running on the SNES, and it was a much more affordable solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
footle

footle

Posted
Posted
It demonstrated that you could barely do 3D on the then-current consoles if you had access to a custom DSP.

As with the Daytona example, it didn't mean much to the 99% of developers outside of the exclusive club who got to work on such esoteric hardware.

You've done an MK again, from:

"Well, where do you think developers were able to figure out 3D graphics and network multiplayer? If there wasn't the commercial incentive to use the PC as a lab for new tech, then you could expect even longer lead times before developers were able to effectively utilise new console generations."

to, effectively,

"Everywhere else where people were using new tech was irrelevant because it wasn't the PC / was too expensive / was too custom."

I also note that a PC capable of running Doom in early 1993 (even if Doom had been released then) was far more expensive than the SNES + Super FX chip.

That the frame rate really isn't relevant, given the difference in cost.

That Starfox was in true 3D, as opposed to Doom's 2.5D - and hey! - was an example of someone using tech to prototype techniques that would get used in later console generations. And making money from it.

Oh, and that you appear to have given up on "PC as the innovator for new tech" in the present tense...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KieronGillen

KieronGillen

Posted
Posted

To be fair, Doom *was* an enormously more innovative game than Starfox. Starfox was an into the screen shooter. Doom was an enormous exploration game with added ultraviolence (also, as an aside, more than anyone else has pushed it). Daytonna was bloody cars. Starfox was a furry shooter. Doom really was like nothing the world had ever seen*.

(And I'm talking as someone with an interest in the prehistory of the FPS)

KG

*Idly, if I were to argue Doom's importance, I may go for art direction as much as the tech involved.

p.s. I still think the PC is the innovator in most new forms of gaming - I just don't think the areas its innovating are areas which a hardcore gamer necessarily will be interested in.

KG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MK-1601

MK-1601

Posted
Posted
You've done an MK again, from:

"Well, where do you think developers were able to figure out 3D graphics and network multiplayer? If there wasn't the commercial incentive to use the PC as a lab for new tech, then you could expect even longer lead times before developers were able to effectively utilise new console generations."

to, effectively,

"Everywhere else where people were using new tech was irrelevant because it wasn't the PC / was too expensive / was too custom."

Statements which are in no way contradictory.

I still can't believe you cited StarFox, and are still going on about it. There were (zomg) true 3D games on the PC years and years before StarFox that technically shat all over it, the difference being that the developers didn't need to finance the development of custom chips to even get the chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Great_Sage_Equal_of_Heaven

Great_Sage_Equal_of_Heaven

Posted
Posted

I can't link to the OP's blog (due to bloody work restricting the inter-web) but is PC gaming really in decline? Has M$'s games for windows idea bombed? Thumbing through my latest multi-format mag the upcoming releases for PC are strong and steady, PC gaming is a sleeping giant IMO - it has been churning out good entertainment (albeit to the beardy bunch in the majority) for many a year.

I have sepia tinted memories of Monkey Island, DOTT, Sam & Max C&C, then Red Alert, Tie Fighter, The Settlers, Civilisation, take your pick of MMORPG's, the list could keep on going and the some of these titles are still being released today. You could say this is stagnating due to the lack of new titles, but some of the best loved games on 360 and forthcoming PS3 titles are sequals to existing franchises.

So in a nut-shell I don't think it is.

Unless I am wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
choddo

choddo

Posted
Posted

Why is Starfox being held up as the exemplar of early 3D gaming when Carrier Command and Starglider 2 (and Powerdrome) were far earlier?

What Doom did which none of those did was textures, basic dynamic lighting and speed. What those did which Doom didn't do was up & down, space lasers and frogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
layten

layten

Posted
Posted
Why is Starfox being held up as the exemplar of early 3D gaming when Carrier Command and Starglider 2 (and Powerdrome) were far earlier?

Because it was most likely the first time console owners saw a proper 3D (well low res and jerky) game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stanley

Stanley

Posted
Posted
Because it was most likely the first time console owners saw a proper 3D (well low res and jerky) game.

At the time it didn't seem like that at all. It was really quite impressive.

It's not as if 3D graphics hadn't been around for a while anyway. My first experience with them was probably Elite, ten years earlier, but it felt like a proper 3D arcade experience, with filled in polys the lot.

As mentioned earlier I was playing X-Wing at around the same time and thought Starfox on the SNES delivered a similar performance to a 386 PC.

It was a sign that times were changing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept