Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Thread: OT: PC FPS Era over ?

OT: PC FPS Era over ?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    18

    OT: PC FPS Era over ?

    I fear that pc games, including FPS, may disappear.

    all the great FPS games (splinter cell, deus ex, doom 3, halo, etc...) were made for the xbox first, and the PC version is just a "rip", by this i say just same load screens, same interface, same menus, etc etc ... like if it was running an emulator.

    In the near future, i don't see much great games that will be released for PC. Maybe HL2, but I'm sure it will be out on xbox too, and maybe on other consoles.

    but in some way I totally understand the game industry, and its choice. of course, it's better for the game and the user, because they know the game will run (only one system - one type of hardware) they don't need to run all the compability tests and all, they just optimize the game for the console, and this is how we get such wonderful games run fast on a 733Mhz system.
    It's a garantee all the users will be satisfied, at least technically.
    I would say it helps produce better games.

    If the xbox supported keyboard, mouse, and Screen output, it would be the best gaming system.




    This thread is really not giving any technical help or tips for Deus Ex, but it might make understand why the game runs so slow (on some PCs).

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    15
    Interesting, but a majority of the people out there have computers then a console. So if they solely made consoles game then they would be limiting their market. Out of 10 people I know, about 2 of them have an Xbox, 4 have a PS2 and all 10 have computers that can run deus ex (if it worked), so I can say that you shouldn;t worry much about it.

  3. #3

    Re: OT: PC FPS Era over ?

    Originally posted by Stengah
    I fear that pc games, including FPS, may disappear.

    all the great FPS games (splinter cell, deus ex, doom 3, halo, etc...) were made for the xbox first, and the PC version is just a "rip", by this i say just same load screens, same interface, same menus, etc etc ... like if it was running an emulator.

    Are you sure the xbox can handle Doom 3?

  4. #4
    Over? No. There are just more games out there. CS is still pretty popular, BF1942 has taken off in a big way, the MoH series continues to roll along, CoD has grabbed a lot of attention.

    And the last time I looked Splinter Cell was a third person game. That's one where you view your character from a distant camera

  5. #5
    Doom 3 for X-Box first? Where on earth did you hear that?

    Anyway, no. I think that the PC FPS genre is doing just fine and will continue to do so for some time to come. Counter-Strike, for example, is the single widest played game ever, bar none. This isn't even taking the time to mention the other big mods (DoD, TFC, etc). HL2 is still on its way, for PC first. Doom 3 AFAIK is being developed for the PC first. Quake 4 is being developed by Raven, a PC development house.

    No, I think PC FPSes are doing just fine.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    25
    And don't forget far cry and stalkerblivion lost while you're at it. And also the much underrated Savage:Battle for newerth.

    Games that add to the genre will go from strength to strength on the PC. Games that add little and attempt to emulate CS will fail. If i read "Tactical squad based shooter" on the back of one more game that does nothing new I swear I'll cry.

    I doubt an X-box would handle the world and environment system in Stalker.

    In other genres as well PC's seem to suit MMORPG games better as well. OK FFXI is coming for the ps2 but I can't see everquest 2 appearing in a decent form on a console.

    Personally I prefer consoles for sports and driving games and pc's for rpg and fps games. Not saying they are better on those systems but I, personally, prefer them on those systems.

  7. #7
    I SERIOUSLY doubt that DooM III will make it on X-box first if it even does make it on X-box. There was already one stage whereby Microsoft tried to push/force Activision/idSoftware to make DooM III X-Box-Only/For-X-Box... but guess what, Activision/idSoftware gave Microsoft the big fat middle finger, in public may I add. Thats the spirit John Carmack, keep it that way, show Microsoft the finger, and show it to them big, and make sure everyone knows it.

    John Carmack is loyal to the PC industry (regardless if it's Windows or *N?X or Mac), he always was and I truely believe he always will be. I've been playing idSoftware games since Wolfenstein-3D, and I have all due respect for John Carmack and his excellent work and help in the PC gaming industry.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20
    I'm one of the more die-hard PC fans... I really can't stick consoles except for the occasional drunken 4-player arcadey game...

    But I have to admit, if there was a good powerful console, with the benefits that a platform with a single hardware config implies, but it had HDTV/Monitor output (1280x720 - that kinda thing)... had a keyboard and mouse, or something similar... For the sake of not having to arse around, I'd be very tempted...

    It does seem writing PC games is getting totally unmanagable for a lot of Devs...

    That said... some manage it!

    I played through Mafia just fine without needing a patch...
    Just got Beyond Good and Evil, and that works perfectly.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    21
    There is no way in sam hill that a console will ever run a FPS correctly.

    You can't, for one, strafe with those Nintendo style controllers. They only just recently added hard drives which enabled one to save one's games.

    PC Games are for complex minds that can handle complex tasks. You'll never ever see something like Master of Orion, Imperium Galactica, or Civilization, for the consoles, unless they're utterly dumbed down and simplified!

  10. #10
    Nope sorry, but eventually consoles are the things that will die out



    why you ask... simple really



    Pretty much everyone has a PC, and pretty soon everyone will have PCs running allmost photorealistic graphics..

    so whats the point in buying a console after that......



    Easier to use you say. Oh come on, by that time everyone will be computer litterate.




    Thats my take on things anyway

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    66
    Consoles = Static Technology

    PCs = Constantly evolving

    hmm..i wonder who is going to last?

    Oh, and by the way moron.. (the guy who said Doom 3 was Xbox)...Doom 3 is not even going to be released for the xbox, its a PC only title at this point, which Carmack himself said. he also said that if they do get around to doing an Xbox release it will be long after the PC version is on shelves, because they will have to cut down the graphics significantly to make it work with the weak Xbox Processor and low amount of RAM..

    Keep this figure in mind pal.

    The E3 Doom 3 Test rig = 2 Gigs of Ram

    Xbox Ram = 64.

    You do the math.

  12. #12
    Originally posted by Joxer1
    You can't, for one, strafe with those Nintendo style controllers. They only just recently added hard drives which enabled one to save one's games.
    I am mostly a PC gamer, but I do have to chime in here.

    You have obviously never played Goldeneye. The left and right C-buttons were strafe left and strafe right. Goldeneye was an awesome game, even if it was a console FPS on a console controller.

    I cannot recall what game was the first console game in history to allow a save game, but the first game I personally remember that allowed you to save your game was the original Legend of Zelda on the NES. It had an EEPROM chip in it that allowed you to save games. That was in 1986.

    Later came flash memory inside the cartridges, so that the carts didn't need a battery.

    Then, as optical systems started coming out, they resorted to external memory cards that attached to the controller or the console itself for game saves. These were/are also flash based.

    So please get a clue before you open your mouth again.

  13. #13
    There IS one thing I will agree on. That is that games are shortened, diminished, and purposely derailed (like Halo and KotOR) to fit XBOX's needs.

    In the case of KotOR, it was reported by GMR Magazine that Microsoft paid LucasArts to delay KotOR's release to the PC by 4 months to enhance XBox sales. Can you say, "Evil Empire" and "Giving in to the Dark Side?" Shame on you two!

    One can only hope that Apple will develope a universal game API and free us from Microsoft (not likely, tho they claim to be trying to become "THE" Gaming Computer-rofl).

    And after playing an intrigue filled mystery like Deus Ex 2 one can only "speculate" on who actually stole the Source Code for Half-Life2. A game that was, at the time of the theft, not scheduled for release on XBox.


    Sparta 3

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    21
    Originally posted by scottws
    I am mostly a PC gamer, but I do have to chime in here.

    You have obviously never played Goldeneye. The left and right C-buttons were strafe left and strafe right. Goldeneye was an awesome game, even if it was a console FPS on a console controller.
    WoooOOOOoooo, one console game has the strafing ability.

    I cannot recall what game was the first console game in history to allow a save game, but the first game I personally remember that allowed you to save your game was the original Legend of Zelda on the NES. It had an EEPROM chip in it that allowed you to save games. That was in 1986.
    Add-on accessories. Expensive, at that.

    As compared to PCs where saving games just comes standard with the package.

    Then, as optical systems started coming out, they resorted to external memory cards that attached to the controller or the console itself for game saves. These were/are also flash based.
    More expensive addons!

    Meanwhile the one hard drive I bought ages ago, has saved games from as far back as Star Control I (which I still play now and then).

    So please get a clue before you open your mouth again.
    On a keyboard I have potentially 100 functions I can call up in a game with one press of a button, depending on how the game designer handles it. If you have 100 functions to call on in a console game how does a dozen buttons (at best) navigate through all of them?

    This is of course less important an issue in Doom II and very relevant in, say, any RTS

    or *ahem*

    Deus Ex..................

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    15
    In your opinion, do you feel that with bigger and better graphics, the game time has diminished? For example, Unreal 2 has nice graphics and music and what not, but did you notice that it was really short?

    Just carious about what people think. No flames please.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20
    Lmao PC games will never dissapear especially FPS since they are imo one of the mainstream genres because of its ease. A person can upgrade their computer, X box you cant. Simply put companies like Microsoft are pressuring devs to make X box games because MIcrosoft & company have money invested in X box. Not to mention it has a wider player base that pC and X box games are imo easier to develop because all the X boxes have the same specs, paramaters and handling capabilities.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    21
    The advantage of a console: you'll never have to worry about 31337 weeneez with $400 video cards telling everyone with < $100 video cards that they have to blow $150 on a new card to play a $50 game.

    The drawbacks: Console graphics become so yesterday before they're even out the door....

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    20
    Originally posted by Joxer1
    The advantage of a console: you'll never have to worry about 31337 weeneez with $400 video cards telling everyone with < $100 video cards that they have to blow $150 on a new card to play a $50 game.

    The drawbacks: Console graphics become so yesterday before they're even out the door....
    First point is good but a console's value doesn't depreciate immediately like a car's...only until a newer consoel comes out. Then its teh next ebst thing.

  19. #19
    lol
    i played goldeneye once

    controls felt like
    trying to aim was quite a nightmare, not even close to the precision of any PC fps.

    dunno why people kept sayign it was such a good game,
    half-life1 was just out at the time, and i don't have to tell you that there is no comparison.

  20. #20
    Originally posted by Joxer1
    The advantage of a console: you'll never have to worry about 31337 weeneez with $400 video cards telling everyone with < $100 video cards that they have to blow $150 on a new card to play a $50 game.

    The drawbacks: Console graphics become so yesterday before they're even out the door....
    Not really much of a problem nowdays,
    seems americans get their hardware so damn cheap,
    I'm over in australia where computer hardware costs double that in the US. and even i manage to get top end hardware on my low low budget.

  21. #21
    As a PC gamer (haven't had a console since the N64), I would think that PC gaming would die out before console gaming ever does, if one of them had to die out, which I don't think will happen anytime soon. The reason being the console side of the industry bringing in more money, if I'm not mistaken. If it's the other way around, then I don't know.

    If you ask me, someone shoudl really create an X-Box-like console that you can plug a computer monitor, keyboard, and mouse into, along with a standard console-ish controler and a TV, sell it for less than $400, and you've got a solid gaming machine right there. Not exactly a console, but not exactly a PC, either. Perhaps make it possible to attach an external hard drive or something. Every five or six years, a new one is released.

    I'd prefer that to having to buy a new $200-$400 video card every two years, along with more RAM, especially since the games would only have to be optimized for one set of hardware. And if they can make a PS2 backwards compatable with PS1 games, they can do the same with this thing.

    OR, I wish someone would give me $3000 every one or two years for a new computer.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    66
    If you can afford the 400 dollar price tag for a cutting edge console every couple years, then there's no reason in hell why you cant fork out a bit more money for a PC upgrade.

  23. #23
    Perhaps, but then a whole new console would buy a lot of other newer, up to date hardware that isn't just a new video card and RAM. I've gone from the lame onboard accelerator, to a GeForce MX, to a Radeon 9600 PRO in the span of 2 years, and I'm still stuck with my 900MHz Duron and old school RAM (100Mhz).

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    25
    OK I' m a pc and a console gamer and I do think fps games are drastically superior on the pc, I run a counterstrike clan and could easily be classed as a PC fps fan boy if you really wanted to but
    I do have to defend golden eye and timesplitters and red faction and the other good fps's out there on consoles.
    Strafing is in nearly all console fps games. Escpecially ps2 ones with the dual analogues.

    As for insulting consoles because they can't save games and then when someone points out that they can save to memory cards or memory built into the cartiridges dismissing that as an added expense. Joker you really are one arn't you. how's the £90 hard drive doing? If the game saves on the cartidge it's not an added expense is it, it's on the cartidge included in the game price. The xbox will let you save to it's built in hard drive at no added cost and ps2 and gamecube memory cards cost about a tenner and can be used for multiple games.

    Putting consoles down as expensive when I just paid £280 for a graphics card to get dx:iw to run at a half decent frame rate just makes me laugh.

    Neither platform will ever die out and diefferent platforms are suited to different games, mainly due to control and UI issues but dismissing consoles is foolishness, and so is dismissing pc gaming.

    And don't get me started on the general malaise (good word huh?) in pc development. Go play ridge racer on the playstation and then play ridge racer 3 or 4 on the same hardware and see what difference time developing on a platform and good programing can make to a game without forcing your customers to go out and spend money on hardware.

    The unreal engine that dx:iw was based on is one of the worst examples of reliance on new hardware, along with the crimnal shaders requirement which has ruled out MX cards.

    HL2, far cry and stalker seem to be finally looking to make efficient and better use of current hardware but until we seem them in action on older machines it's hard to say.

  25. #25
    Originally posted by Joxer1
    WoooOOOOoooo, one console game has the strafing ability.
    It's the only one I could think of, sure. But you said that strafing wasn't possible on Nintendo-style controllers. I proved you dead wrong.

    Joxer1
    Add-on accessories. Expensive, at that.
    You have no idea what you're talking about. The EEPROM chip and battery were built inside the cartridge. It came with the game! And The Legend of Zelda was the same price as every other game.

    Joxer1
    As compared to PCs where saving games just comes standard with the package.
    I agree, it's nice to save on the hard drive. However, until the optical systems debuted, saving on consoles wasn't a problem. Remember, during the era when even carts didn't have an EEPROM or flash memory for game saves, it was during the arcade era. Every console game was some sort of arcade port, generally speaking. Those that weren't were short enough that saving was irrelevant.

    Now, since consoles use optical discs, saving is done by a memory card.

    Joxer1
    More expensive addons!
    Sure, they are expensive per MB, but overall they are cheap. I have no qualms spending $15-30 to save games. Also, console saves are optimized for space. Most games save everything you need for a tiny fraction of space compared to what a PC game would save.

    Joxer1
    Meanwhile the one hard drive I bought ages ago, has saved games from as far back as Star Control I (which I still play now and then).
    Congratulations. All my old cartridges still have their saves on them and all my memory cards do also.

    Joxer1
    On a keyboard I have potentially 100 functions I can call up in a game with one press of a button, depending on how the game designer handles it. If you have 100 functions to call on in a console game how does a dozen buttons (at best) navigate through all of them?
    When did I ever try to argue that a console controller was better? The only time I mentioned it was in reference to your completely, ludicrously false statement.

    I agree that the keyboard and mouse combination is generally better than a console controller. That's why I'm a PC gamer for the most part.

    Joxer1
    This is of course less important an issue in Doom II and very relevant in, say, any RTS

    or *ahem*

    Deus Ex..................
    I agree.

    Joxer1
    The drawbacks: Console graphics become so yesterday before they're even out the door....
    Actually, that is also completely false. Generally speaking, console games look better than PC games in the consoles second year of life. The first year usually isn't as good because developers don't know the limits of the hardware is well. The second year they come into their own.

    PC developers on the otherhand are building games for three year old technology, and therefore the overall visual quality suffers. In a situation like now, the third/fourth year into the current console generation, low-end PC tech has caught up to the consoles, and therefore PC games start looking better.

    Look, dude, no one is arguing which is better. You made statements that completey reveal your ignorance in this topic, and I corrected you, it's as simple as that.

Page 1 of 2 12 Last