cptnjarhead
Distinguished
- Jun 22, 2009
- 395
- 0
- 18,780
- Status
Tired? It died two years ago, as far as gaming is concerned. Indeed, the focus is no longer gaming.
The hardware isn't just outdated. It's ancient. We hit the brick wall of reality with the current crop of consoles a long time ago; new games have not made any tangible technological or graphical advancements. There is nothing left to squeeze out of these machines, and there hasn't been for a while. New games which do push the envelope run like sh*t.
Outside the forum of gaming, it's a less ugly picture. I'm glad they've been enabling features like YouTube and whatnot and trying to repurpose the Xbox as an entertainment hub rather than a gaming console, or it would be truly useless to keep around. And even though that's a step in the right direction, it's still not enough.
If only they'd open the console up and let us make real use of the hardware. They would be great XBMC platforms, like the original Xbox, which I used for almost a decade as a media centre.
I don't care about the Xbox at all, though. People like it, they buy it, doesn't affect me, so who cares, right? Except it affects us all, in a way. What bothers me is that the console industry is holding gaming back - as games developers have to release titles that can run in the appalling confines of the old hardware, most releases over the last few years have been lacklustre in the technical department. If you wondered why graphics vendors AMD and NVIDIA have been pushing their GPGPU tech as hard as the actual graphics horsepower of their recent releases, well, there's one of many reasons right there: raw power isn't a selling point when none of the sodding games take advantage of it.
Meanwhile, we've had hardware which can do what the Xbox 360 / PS3 does (streaming/playing videos) for eons, and with a lot less noise and heat generated too. They are redundant and outdated in every sense, even with all these recent additions. Don't pretend Kinect or Move brings anything worthwhile to the table, either.
There is a flipside: by strangling the gaming industry and the technical quality of the games, it is now possible for computer hardware to last much longer before feeling like it's run out of poke to play the newest titles. I guess that's a silver lining, as is the increased focus on hardware energy efficiency.
The hardware isn't just outdated. It's ancient. We hit the brick wall of reality with the current crop of consoles a long time ago; new games have not made any tangible technological or graphical advancements. There is nothing left to squeeze out of these machines, and there hasn't been for a while. New games which do push the envelope run like sh*t.
Outside the forum of gaming, it's a less ugly picture. I'm glad they've been enabling features like YouTube and whatnot and trying to repurpose the Xbox as an entertainment hub rather than a gaming console, or it would be truly useless to keep around. And even though that's a step in the right direction, it's still not enough.
If only they'd open the console up and let us make real use of the hardware. They would be great XBMC platforms, like the original Xbox, which I used for almost a decade as a media centre.
I don't care about the Xbox at all, though. People like it, they buy it, doesn't affect me, so who cares, right? Except it affects us all, in a way. What bothers me is that the console industry is holding gaming back - as games developers have to release titles that can run in the appalling confines of the old hardware, most releases over the last few years have been lacklustre in the technical department. If you wondered why graphics vendors AMD and NVIDIA have been pushing their GPGPU tech as hard as the actual graphics horsepower of their recent releases, well, there's one of many reasons right there: raw power isn't a selling point when none of the sodding games take advantage of it.
Meanwhile, we've had hardware which can do what the Xbox 360 / PS3 does (streaming/playing videos) for eons, and with a lot less noise and heat generated too. They are redundant and outdated in every sense, even with all these recent additions. Don't pretend Kinect or Move brings anything worthwhile to the table, either.
There is a flipside: by strangling the gaming industry and the technical quality of the games, it is now possible for computer hardware to last much longer before feeling like it's run out of poke to play the newest titles. I guess that's a silver lining, as is the increased focus on hardware energy efficiency.
zaznet
Distinguished
- May 10, 2010
- 387
- 0
- 18,780
They are trying to maximize their mileage out of the existing consoles and not taking enough advantage from incremental improvements. If they would just learn from the success of Kinect that a small change to their platform can result in significant increases in sales. The upcoming 720 however will abandon the 360 owners where the Kinect improved on their existing systems and game library.
Imagine the backlash Apple would get if the new Ipad didn't run any of the apps you purchased on your 1st or 2nd generation Ipad. By ensuring my purchase today will be usable tomorrow Apple gives the consumer a confidence not often found in the gaming market. Microsoft has a huge market lead and about to abandon it's existing customers with the new platform. The good news is they realize their current market so they aren't doing it soon but without something to bridge 360 to 720 they could face an uphill battle when the next-gen console competition heats up again.
Imagine the backlash Apple would get if the new Ipad didn't run any of the apps you purchased on your 1st or 2nd generation Ipad. By ensuring my purchase today will be usable tomorrow Apple gives the consumer a confidence not often found in the gaming market. Microsoft has a huge market lead and about to abandon it's existing customers with the new platform. The good news is they realize their current market so they aren't doing it soon but without something to bridge 360 to 720 they could face an uphill battle when the next-gen console competition heats up again.
[citation][nom]zaznet[/nom]They are trying to maximize their mileage out of the existing consoles and not taking enough advantage from incremental improvements. If they would just learn from the success of Kinect that a small change to their platform can result in significant increases in sales. The upcoming 720 however will abandon the 360 owners where the Kinect improved on their existing systems and game library.Imagine the backlash Apple would get if the new Ipad didn't run any of the apps you purchased on your 1st or 2nd generation Ipad. By ensuring my purchase today will be usable tomorrow Apple gives the consumer a confidence not often found in the gaming market. Microsoft has a huge market lead and about to abandon it's existing customers with the new platform. The good news is they realize their current market so they aren't doing it soon but without something to bridge 360 to 720 they could face an uphill battle when the next-gen console competition heats up again.[/citation]
720 won't abandon 360 owners - not at all. I'd expect, as would most consumers, that the 720 will be backwards compatible with 360 games and major hardware (Kinect, controllers).
Now, were there to be no DVD drive, then yes, that would be a step away from customers and their games libraries. Perhaps they're planning on an optional external drive for backwards compatibility, or perhaps they will allow you to download the games off the XBL service instead of using your discs.
Either way, it would be madness for them not to cater for the huge 360 market. As you said, imagine the backlash.
I'm guessing you haven't been through many console launches of the past, but for the last few cycles (as far as MS/Sony are concerned) it has largely been a case of the new generation being backwards-compatible with the last, to varying but tangible degrees.
720 won't abandon 360 owners - not at all. I'd expect, as would most consumers, that the 720 will be backwards compatible with 360 games and major hardware (Kinect, controllers).
Now, were there to be no DVD drive, then yes, that would be a step away from customers and their games libraries. Perhaps they're planning on an optional external drive for backwards compatibility, or perhaps they will allow you to download the games off the XBL service instead of using your discs.
Either way, it would be madness for them not to cater for the huge 360 market. As you said, imagine the backlash.
I'm guessing you haven't been through many console launches of the past, but for the last few cycles (as far as MS/Sony are concerned) it has largely been a case of the new generation being backwards-compatible with the last, to varying but tangible degrees.
snowzsan
Distinguished
- Jun 9, 2011
- 154
- 0
- 18,690
[citation][nom]amk-aka-Phantom[/nom]I used to be like that. Then I got a proper gaming desktop and now that I DO know the way it's meant to be played, I don't see why I should settle for less.[/citation]
Unless you start developing games, you should have to settle for less. You know what you were getting into when you built/bought your rig, so how is this a shocker to you? If you didn't know, then why did you start building a rig without doing all the research? Not only that, but computers have far more uses than merely gaming. But that's beside the point.
Consoles generate more revenue, and that's the bottom line. For console gamers, myself included, it's an "out-of-the-box" platform that will, without a doubt, support anything released for it. It eliminates the "well can it..." idea that haunts anyone whenever a new game is released. If anything, console gamers are the intelligent ones in the fact that they're purchasing these consoles at what... $300 a pop, if that. We built/bought these rigs are what... $800 - $1500 a pop? All the while knowing we're A)not a priority to devs and B)purchased unnecessarily powerful hardware to appease a market that doesn't even utilize it. So technically, who's the morons? You can call "future proofing" all you want but that doesn't change the fact. Consoles take the cake in terms of ease of use to me.
As for the Xbox 720 having no optical drive, could this perhaps lead to a new medium that doesn't involve spinning discs and mechanical parts? I'm all for eliminating the mechanical components because they're prone to failure. Well, I guess it wouldn't be a new medium but if Microsoft managed to find a way to obtain faster load times and increased storage on say, an SD Card like removable media that could surpass spinning discs and platters, I'm all for it.
As for not being backwards compatible, how often do you honestly go back to last gen games on a console? How often are you popping an Xbox original game into your 360? Not very often, I bet. So it's implementations would be useless, to say the least. But for those of you who enjoy doing this and not just sporting the "I like the option" mentality, there are other ways. As previously stated by someone else, an optical drive could be sold separately for backwards compatibility, or entering the UPC code from your game's case on the console could allow you to digitally download the game to your console's storage device, etc. etc.
There's always a way.
Unless you start developing games, you should have to settle for less. You know what you were getting into when you built/bought your rig, so how is this a shocker to you? If you didn't know, then why did you start building a rig without doing all the research? Not only that, but computers have far more uses than merely gaming. But that's beside the point.
Consoles generate more revenue, and that's the bottom line. For console gamers, myself included, it's an "out-of-the-box" platform that will, without a doubt, support anything released for it. It eliminates the "well can it..." idea that haunts anyone whenever a new game is released. If anything, console gamers are the intelligent ones in the fact that they're purchasing these consoles at what... $300 a pop, if that. We built/bought these rigs are what... $800 - $1500 a pop? All the while knowing we're A)not a priority to devs and B)purchased unnecessarily powerful hardware to appease a market that doesn't even utilize it. So technically, who's the morons? You can call "future proofing" all you want but that doesn't change the fact. Consoles take the cake in terms of ease of use to me.
As for the Xbox 720 having no optical drive, could this perhaps lead to a new medium that doesn't involve spinning discs and mechanical parts? I'm all for eliminating the mechanical components because they're prone to failure. Well, I guess it wouldn't be a new medium but if Microsoft managed to find a way to obtain faster load times and increased storage on say, an SD Card like removable media that could surpass spinning discs and platters, I'm all for it.
As for not being backwards compatible, how often do you honestly go back to last gen games on a console? How often are you popping an Xbox original game into your 360? Not very often, I bet. So it's implementations would be useless, to say the least. But for those of you who enjoy doing this and not just sporting the "I like the option" mentality, there are other ways. As previously stated by someone else, an optical drive could be sold separately for backwards compatibility, or entering the UPC code from your game's case on the console could allow you to digitally download the game to your console's storage device, etc. etc.
There's always a way.
[citation][nom]CrArC[/nom]Tired? It died two years ago, as far as gaming is concerned. Indeed, the focus is no longer gaming.The hardware isn't just outdated. It's ancient. We hit the brick wall of reality with the current crop of consoles a long time ago; new games have not made any tangible technological or graphical advancements. There is nothing left to squeeze out of these machines, and there hasn't been for a while. New games which do push the envelope run like sh*t. Outside the forum of gaming, it's a less ugly picture. I'm glad they've been enabling features like YouTube and whatnot and trying to repurpose the Xbox as an entertainment hub rather than a gaming console, or it would be truly useless to keep around. And even though that's a step in the right direction, it's still not enough.If only they'd open the console up and let us make real use of the hardware. They would be great XBMC platforms, like the original Xbox, which I used for almost a decade as a media centre.I don't care about the Xbox at all, though. People like it, they buy it, doesn't affect me, so who cares, right? Except it affects us all, in a way. What bothers me is that the console industry is holding gaming back - as games developers have to release titles that can run in the appalling confines of the old hardware, most releases over the last few years have been lacklustre in the technical department. If you wondered why graphics vendors AMD and NVIDIA have been pushing their GPGPU tech as hard as the actual graphics horsepower of their recent releases, well, there's one of many reasons right there: raw power isn't a selling point when none of the sodding games take advantage of it.Meanwhile, we've had hardware which can do what the Xbox 360 / PS3 does (streaming/playing videos) for eons, and with a lot less noise and heat generated too. They are redundant and outdated in every sense, even with all these recent additions. Don't pretend Kinect or Move brings anything worthwhile to the table, either. There is a flipside: by strangling the gaming industry and the technical quality of the games, it is now possible for computer hardware to last much longer before feeling like it's run out of poke to play the newest titles. I guess that's a silver lining, as is the increased focus on hardware energy efficiency.[/citation]
The opinion you represent is one that is a product of a "bubble" that your view your situation from.
The vast majority of people who possess hardware capable enough to easily handle most computer games with little to no hardware issues are absolutely minute in the eyes of the developer.
You, unfortunately are not the majority and never will be. Its a sadly stated fact that will need to be accepted before any other rational conversation can take place.
A developer is never going to spend the type of money that is required (20 million+) to develop a game on a platform (PC) that puts a monetary requirement on their customers ($2000+ Spec Computer) to be able to enjoy as intended.
The primary use for computers in our society is not gaming. It will never be gaming. So expecting games from developers using PC as a primary platform is foolish.
The few developers who do end up using PC's as their main platform have to put in place DRM requirements like "always being connected to the internet" to play their games to protect their sales. Which in turn gets bitched about insistently (See Diablo III).
You complain about the vast majority of the developers who do not put the PC first using the argument that they hold back graphics and that the games are not optimized for your hardware. Yet the few developers that do use the PC as their main platform get bashed for protecting their revenue.
You cannot have it both ways. For PC to be the standard platform will require that either CLOUD gaming become mainstream (and the whole basis for having a high-end computer is moot) or the PC gaming community accepting and dealing with DRM requirements that work. (Online requirement)
In turn, people for the most part can buy a 200-300 dollar console, buy used games and generally game on the cheep without being forced to meet a min. spec requirement to play a game.
I implore most of you to take a look at the Tom Hardware Forum discussion for Gaming to see for yourselves. 75% of the posts are about games not running on their hardware, 15% are about weather or not there computer can handle a game. 5% are about what to do with the over-speced beast PC they built and the other 5% is actually discussions based on games.
You cannot expect the PC Platform to be open and inviting to developers who want to produce the Blockbuster titles that will push PC hardware. Its like saying crack has medicinal qualities. Only a crackhead would make that argument.
Blaming the Developers want for a closed spec environment to produce games for shows how little understanding you have about the development of that of which you want to play. Its almost as if there is an aura of entitlement that comes when you attach that SLI bridge.
Terreria and SpaceChem are 2 of the best games I have played over the past 5 years. Both are grossly enjoyable and time consuming. Two games that if which were super popular beyond their niche would be deemed detrimental to PC development because they do not push PC hardware to the brink.
Would you rail against those games?
What would it actually take to make the PC Gaming community happy?
Because it is obvious that the games themselves wont, regardless of how 'advanced' they are.
The opinion you represent is one that is a product of a "bubble" that your view your situation from.
The vast majority of people who possess hardware capable enough to easily handle most computer games with little to no hardware issues are absolutely minute in the eyes of the developer.
You, unfortunately are not the majority and never will be. Its a sadly stated fact that will need to be accepted before any other rational conversation can take place.
A developer is never going to spend the type of money that is required (20 million+) to develop a game on a platform (PC) that puts a monetary requirement on their customers ($2000+ Spec Computer) to be able to enjoy as intended.
The primary use for computers in our society is not gaming. It will never be gaming. So expecting games from developers using PC as a primary platform is foolish.
The few developers who do end up using PC's as their main platform have to put in place DRM requirements like "always being connected to the internet" to play their games to protect their sales. Which in turn gets bitched about insistently (See Diablo III).
You complain about the vast majority of the developers who do not put the PC first using the argument that they hold back graphics and that the games are not optimized for your hardware. Yet the few developers that do use the PC as their main platform get bashed for protecting their revenue.
You cannot have it both ways. For PC to be the standard platform will require that either CLOUD gaming become mainstream (and the whole basis for having a high-end computer is moot) or the PC gaming community accepting and dealing with DRM requirements that work. (Online requirement)
In turn, people for the most part can buy a 200-300 dollar console, buy used games and generally game on the cheep without being forced to meet a min. spec requirement to play a game.
I implore most of you to take a look at the Tom Hardware Forum discussion for Gaming to see for yourselves. 75% of the posts are about games not running on their hardware, 15% are about weather or not there computer can handle a game. 5% are about what to do with the over-speced beast PC they built and the other 5% is actually discussions based on games.
You cannot expect the PC Platform to be open and inviting to developers who want to produce the Blockbuster titles that will push PC hardware. Its like saying crack has medicinal qualities. Only a crackhead would make that argument.
Blaming the Developers want for a closed spec environment to produce games for shows how little understanding you have about the development of that of which you want to play. Its almost as if there is an aura of entitlement that comes when you attach that SLI bridge.
Terreria and SpaceChem are 2 of the best games I have played over the past 5 years. Both are grossly enjoyable and time consuming. Two games that if which were super popular beyond their niche would be deemed detrimental to PC development because they do not push PC hardware to the brink.
Would you rail against those games?
What would it actually take to make the PC Gaming community happy?
Because it is obvious that the games themselves wont, regardless of how 'advanced' they are.
RADIO_ACTIVE
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2008
- 897
- 0
- 18,990
eddieroolz
Splendid
- Sep 6, 2008
- 7,057
- 0
- 25,860
zaznet
Distinguished
- May 10, 2010
- 387
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]CrArC[/nom]*snip*
Now, were there to be no DVD drive, then yes, that would be a step away from customers and their games libraries.
*snip*[/citation]
They are already headed in that direction. Adding the drive is the easiest way to ensure my library is not abandoned by jumping to the 720. I hope you are right but past experience has proven that backwards support isn't the highest priority. With more games coming over a download source these days the disc library is going away slowly but it's still there. I haven't bought a game on disc for my PC in quite some time (not including CE versions of an MMO which is also available for direct download).
New AAA releases for the 360 and PS3 are primarily available in disc only format. This means I can't choose to go with the model that will be more common with the 720. We see this model with the PS Vita and Apple/Android touch devices.
I hope they will bridge that gap but time will tell.
And no, not my first "next gen" console experience. I've owned way too many consoles to list going back to the Atari, Intellivision and original NES.
Now, were there to be no DVD drive, then yes, that would be a step away from customers and their games libraries.
*snip*[/citation]
They are already headed in that direction. Adding the drive is the easiest way to ensure my library is not abandoned by jumping to the 720. I hope you are right but past experience has proven that backwards support isn't the highest priority. With more games coming over a download source these days the disc library is going away slowly but it's still there. I haven't bought a game on disc for my PC in quite some time (not including CE versions of an MMO which is also available for direct download).
New AAA releases for the 360 and PS3 are primarily available in disc only format. This means I can't choose to go with the model that will be more common with the 720. We see this model with the PS Vita and Apple/Android touch devices.
I hope they will bridge that gap but time will tell.
And no, not my first "next gen" console experience. I've owned way too many consoles to list going back to the Atari, Intellivision and original NES.
demonhorde665
Distinguished
- Jul 13, 2008
- 1,492
- 0
- 19,280
[citation][nom]snowzsan[/nom]Wow, wow! Why all the hate? I understand from your standpoint that if consoles don't up the ante, neither will game developers making your monster rigs virtually useless for gaming (trust me, I know how you feel) but why bag on the Xbox? It does what it's supposed to do and it may not do it perfectly, but it still does it. I bet all of us can name a time when we were stuck with a rig that stood no chance of playing a game properly but we still did it anyway, and we didn't care (think parent's computer when we were younger) because the choppy graphics didn't take away from the experience, so why in the hell is it "OH SO GOD DAMN IMPORTANT UBER BENCH MARK AND EVERYTHING IS ABOUT GRAPHICS" is the first god damn thing you look for?But besides the nostalgia who cares if Microsoft isn't announcing their console? I own a 360 and I have zero complaints. I have yet to max out my GPU but I'm sure I never will. Computer tech will always be above console tech.[/citation]
My thoughts exactly, i remember some time ago back when i was running a amd k62 , and sporting a mighty (at the time) TNT nvidia card , pc gamers ever where were snobbing console gamers over the fact that pc games are deeper and more meaning full and graphics don't really matter.
fast forward to today and that is all i ever hear most my fellow pc gamer's talk about. and i'm just sitting here thinking WTF ?
I PREFER the fact that game's havent really pushed my system in 4 years. because the honest truth is , if things go back to the days of every 6 months your pc is useless as a gaming system , I will quit pc gaming , In today's economy I don't have the money to buy a new rig ever year hell i dont have the money to buy a new rig every 2-3 years even. So what if nothing challenges my system i really don't like to see my system challenged because god forbid I'm not a rich spoiled shit of a boy. and to all you guys blasted console saying they are holding stuff back .. screw you for wanting every one but your rich ass to have their pc outdated overnight.
LONG LIVE the current gen consoles !
because it means my computer wil last me all the longer as well
My thoughts exactly, i remember some time ago back when i was running a amd k62 , and sporting a mighty (at the time) TNT nvidia card , pc gamers ever where were snobbing console gamers over the fact that pc games are deeper and more meaning full and graphics don't really matter.
fast forward to today and that is all i ever hear most my fellow pc gamer's talk about. and i'm just sitting here thinking WTF ?
I PREFER the fact that game's havent really pushed my system in 4 years. because the honest truth is , if things go back to the days of every 6 months your pc is useless as a gaming system , I will quit pc gaming , In today's economy I don't have the money to buy a new rig ever year hell i dont have the money to buy a new rig every 2-3 years even. So what if nothing challenges my system i really don't like to see my system challenged because god forbid I'm not a rich spoiled shit of a boy. and to all you guys blasted console saying they are holding stuff back .. screw you for wanting every one but your rich ass to have their pc outdated overnight.
LONG LIVE the current gen consoles !
because it means my computer wil last me all the longer as well
hannibal
Distinguished
- Apr 1, 2004
- 2,881
- 252
- 21,190
One thing to consider is that Xbox has Kinect 2.0 camera with the console. It most propably would have been 150$ separately, that is why the xbox has a little bit worse hardware, to cut the price.
Is the Kinect 2.0 a worth of it... It is harder to say. If it is as usefull as Kinect 1, then not, but this is suposed to be much better and allso get more support.
But PS4 is in stronger gound at this moment, but we don't really know how game selling and DRM works in Sonys console... It may even turn out that WiiU will be the "best" console because less user harrasment. After the Cristmast we will see...
Is the Kinect 2.0 a worth of it... It is harder to say. If it is as usefull as Kinect 1, then not, but this is suposed to be much better and allso get more support.
But PS4 is in stronger gound at this moment, but we don't really know how game selling and DRM works in Sonys console... It may even turn out that WiiU will be the "best" console because less user harrasment. After the Cristmast we will see...
is the kinect 2 useful...
have i ever thought it would be easier to get my console to understand what i say apposed to pressing a button?
have i ever thought "i want to shoot my arm out to the left... no wait the right, to open that menu... damn it was the left" again, opposed to a button press?
seriously, i have a keyboard for my consoles for a reason.
have i ever thought it would be easier to get my console to understand what i say apposed to pressing a button?
have i ever thought "i want to shoot my arm out to the left... no wait the right, to open that menu... damn it was the left" again, opposed to a button press?
seriously, i have a keyboard for my consoles for a reason.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Microsoft Defender found Trojans on my PC- Started by Tommy Sawyer
- Replies: 4
-
Question Can I just upgrade my graphics card or should I be upgrading my processor as well for UE5?- Started by Tolstoy1990
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 3K
Latest posts
-
-
Question Microsoft Defender found Trojans on my PC
- Latest: ohio_buckeye
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram