Jump to content

Home

Consoles - Should They Get The Games First?


BCanr2d2

Recommended Posts

Since the release, or announcement of the XBOX, and the "steal" of Halo: Combat Evolved onto the XBOX platform, people have started to complain about the treatment that the consoles get over the PC...

 

Why do they get the games first?

IMO - They are a larger market, so they should get the preferential treatment over the PC market for the home user. After all a console is a lot cheaper to buy, and no need for constant upgrades - means more money for games.

I know people that wouldn't think twice about having a GameCube, PS2 or XBOX, but would shirk at going anywhere near a PC.

 

Why do certain platforms get preferntial treatment over others?

 

I know there is plenty to discuss, rather than just the XBOX stealing games from PC's, so too does Sony and the PS2...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can play strategy games on PC, as well as RPG's (*real* RPG's) - I sure don't hope they take away those genres and release them for consoles first, no matter what blasted reason they have.

 

The graphics and overall horsepower on PC's are better as well.

 

"Let's tweak this game to a horrible resolution and processing power, so that when it'll finally be ported to PC, it looks like complete sh*t." - yeah, way to go.

 

Halo was originally being made for macs, the only hope the mac-gamers had was this game. Then it began to develop to fit PC too, which is okay - as long as it was going to come out for mac at the same time. It was going to be really, really big - people knew that....

 

Then the phenomena known only as "Microsucks" came and basically ripped people's hearts out... :crybaby:

 

No, I haven't tried Halo on Xbox - I simply can't get used to those silly controllers no matter how many time I've tried them. I'm afraid I'd think the game is bad because the way you control it stinks.

 

Yes, you can all have your pretty driving, platform and Final Fantasy games - just don't take away those games that'll only have real potential on other platforms - I'm talking 'bout the real games: FPS's and deep strategy games.

 

This biased rant was brought to you by Jais.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a Xbox, PS2, GC, GBA, GB, SNES, N64, PS1, Laptop, used to have a Nintendo, All I have is this one computer.

Jeez, my best friend live in the middle of the desert and is constantly doing chores, he has a N64, my other friend got a N64 last year for his B-Day, this year he got a GC. AHHHHGGGRRRR

STUPID PARENTS!, they don't let me get any thing.

I just hope the put Halo on PC soon :firemad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Carl Shutt

The developers should make games for which ever platform suits them.

 

Exactly.

 

Don't think you can make Q3 or UT to consoles, and don't think you can get away with converting fighting games (tekken etc) to PC and expect it to be the same, good game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Tie 23

I don't have a Xbox, PS2, GC, GBA, GB, SNES, N64, PS1, Laptop....

 

Therein lies part of the problem, for me. There are such a number and variety of consoles out there, it would be hard to pick just one and stick with it. If you have one...and find out the sequel to one of the games you already have is coming out on another console platform...what do you do? Just buy the other console? And the other other console? That doesn't sound very cheap to me in the long run.

 

As for anyone who doesn't like PCs. Power to ya! They're not for everyone, and not everyone needs them for work as well as play. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I do, so I think I'll stick to my PC for now. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Bcndr2, consoles get the games first because it is a much larger market.

 

 

 

Originally posted by Carl Shutt

The developers should make games for which ever platform suits them.

 

 

Exactly right, developers have an idea of how they want their particular game to look and they try to figure out which platform that will be best accomplished with...... *whew* :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Leemu Taos

Exactly right, developers have an idea of how they want their particular game to look and they try to figure out which platform that will be best accomplished with...... *whew* :D

 

Which is exactly why I think it's such a deep, deep tragedy that Microsoft ripped Halo out of the developer's hands and vision...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by cjais

 

Which is exactly why I think it's such a deep, deep tragedy that Microsoft ripped Halo out of the developer's hands and vision...

 

 

HHmmmmm.......I don't know the whole story bud. ;) Please enlighten me! I guess you could send me a pm or something.....*shrugs*

 

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consoles games to the makers are easy to make compaired to PC games as they don't have to mess with all the windows, install menus, ect..... so it is easy on the makers. And then

 

That doesn't sound very cheap to me in the long run.

 

Take a new PC that is as good or better than a console and compair prices.

 

 

$2500(This is how much this computer I am useing costed)

 

GameCube $200

PS2 $300

X-box $300

GBA $50-$100

PS1 $100

N64 $65

Dreamcast $70

------------------------

$1135

 

$2500

-$1135

-----------

$1365 is the difference

 

So which one is cheaper?

 

I can save up for something that is $200 with my income, but not something that is $2500. So more people can buy consoles than PCs. Though I like them both. You try taking a computer over to a friends house every day and you will see some of the things I like about consoles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whiteraider: Don't forget the console games cost nearly the double of PC ones.

 

Leemu: Oh, it's not such a interesting story really - basically Bungie was developing Halo for Mac at first, then figured the PC version would be the exact same. However, they did have this vision of a huge online game - it'd be greater than Q3 'n all that. They wanted it to be controlled with keyboard and mouse, they wanted it to be a kind of military sim - dunno what's left of it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by TheWhiteRaider

Take a new PC that is as good or better than a console and compair prices.

 

$2500(This is how much this computer I am useing costed)

 

GameCube $200

PS2 $300

X-box $300

GBA $50-$100

PS1 $100

N64 $65

Dreamcast $70

------------------------

$1135

 

$2500

-$1135

-----------

$1365 is the difference

 

So which one is cheaper?

 

I can save up for something that is $200 with my income, but not something that is $2500. So more people can buy consoles than PCs.

 

No, sorry, I don't accept that argument at all. If you're going to do a comparison on price, then at least compare the price of a PC that is of a comparable specification to the XBox as a reference point. :rolleyes: If you paid $2,500 for a PC that has the same spec as an X-Box then you were seriously ripped off (even at the time of the X-Box's initial release).

 

I can pick up a PC with a better spec than an X-Box for around £600. That equates to approximately $936...not $2,500. And that includes a decent monitor. :rolleyes: BTW...you didn't add the cost of a television set, which is relevant if you are still living at home using your parent's TV - what happens when you move out?

 

And then there is the cost of the actual games, as point out above. I can get most of my PC games for around £25-30...but most of the console titles I see are priced around £40, and that price rarely, if ever, drops. So for £200 I could buy up to 8 PC titles (more if they're on budget release), but only 5 console titles. ;)

 

Though I like them both. You try taking a computer over to a friends house every day and you will see some of the things I like about consoles.

 

I totally agree. But if I was going to lug PCs around everywhere, I'd buy a notebook PC. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say that my computer it is the same as a X-box. And still if you are going for a £600 computer by the time you add up a X-box+TV+Games compaired to Computer w/Moniter+Keyboard+Speakers+Mouse+Games+Network system to play multiplayer with friends when they are over at your house+More computers to put on the network+The work to set up the network+Useing plug and pray (as I call it)+Putting up with the blue screen of death+A good internet conetion +And a heck of a lot of errors.

 

I like them both, but realy by the time you add up all the costs the computer still cost more. I like how flexible computers are, but there are something that consoles are better for. Such as console are portable. They are easy to play multiplayer you only need one console and you only need to pay for more controlers.

 

My computer specs are

 

Pentium IV 2.7 GHZ processor

64 MB DDR Nvida Gefore 4 MX 420 /w TV out

712 MBs of ram

Windows XP

Logitech Optical Mouse

 

edit: Also My sound card is a speacal card that is for Radio work.

 

I can't remember the sound card and a few others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a broadband connection and an X-box you can play with the whole world come the end of november.............

And WhiteRaiders Console prices are a lot higher than they really are. PS2's and Xboxes are only 200 dollars. and gamecubes run around 150 i believe...... So it would only cost me 550 to purchase all 3 systems, plus......270 more dollars if I want 4 conrtollers with each system...then lets say I buy a 31 inch TV for 400 dollars. 1220 dollars for the top 3 console systems, fully loaded with controllers and a big enough TV to comfortably play 4 player games on. And those consoles will be able to play every single game that is released for them. Unlike the computer, in a year or two the games for the PC will have requirements that your PC cannot meet, requiring either a new PC or upgrades, both costing plenty of money.

 

I have nothing against PC's i play a lot of games on them. But consoles deffinately have their advantages as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by ET Warrior

If you have a broadband connection and an X-box you can play with the whole world come the end of november.............

And WhiteRaiders Console prices are a lot higher than they really are. PS2's and Xboxes are only 200 dollars. and gamecubes run around 150 i believe...... So it would only cost me 550 to purchase all 3 systems, plus......270 more dollars if I want 4 conrtollers with each system...then lets say I buy a 31 inch TV for 400 dollars. 1220 dollars for the top 3 console systems, fully loaded with controllers and a big enough TV to comfortably play 4 player games on. And those consoles will be able to play every single game that is released for them. Unlike the computer, in a year or two the games for the PC will have requirements that your PC cannot meet, requiring either a new PC or upgrades, both costing plenty of money.

 

I have nothing against PC's i play a lot of games on them. But consoles deffinately have their advantages as well.

 

But my prices were the ones when they were released.

 

But then again, once you have a PC and an internet connection, you can practically play with the entire world!

 

I know. My point is that a PC still costs more. And somethings on PC you still pay more. And you also pay more in time not just money. And their is repair costs(My Nintendo is still working and I never had to repair it once, but my PC is a different story.), internet costs, and cost to play with some games(EverQuest, SW Galaxies, ect.). So in the end a PC costs more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to the purchase of a console, people will already have a TV, usually no need to buy it. Once again, consoles and PC's aren't aimed at those who are teenagers, they are aimed at those with disposable income..... They are aiming it at the mid to late 20's as the main source of income, with the obvious appeal to the late teen market as well...

 

My thoughts were more about how it has taken such little serious competition from the console market, and everyone is complaining that they have to wait for games...

For so long the PC has been the top of the heap, most important revenue stream for game developers. Now that the PS2 and XBOX are shifting software totals outstripping those of PC's, and with XBOX a relatively cheap port, it is money for nothing....

 

Now that the PC isn't a game developers FIRST priority, and IMO I don't see the PC regaining it either, we must get used to the consoles having most of the games first, or at least released at the same time. Whilst there will still be PC only titles, many will be cross platform, and consoles may get preferrential treatment due to the much larger consumer market out there......

 

All I can say is - healthy competition in the console market can only benefit PC and console gamers alike. Who'd want to say that a PC game didn't live up to the console - especially in the area supposedly dominated on the PC - graphics.....

Answer: NO ONE, so they will only lift their efforts to make better games...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by cjais

 

Leemu: Oh, it's not such a interesting story really - basically Bungie was developing Halo for Mac at first, then figured the PC version would be the exact same. However, they did have this vision of a huge online game - it'd be greater than Q3 'n all that. They wanted it to be controlled with keyboard and mouse, they wanted it to be a kind of military sim - dunno what's left of it now.

 

 

Thx for the info Cjais!! So no vision of takin' over the world huh? That's kind of interesting........very surprising as well in this day and age when it's all about $$$$.

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...