Loading ...
Consoles VS PC
Posted by isecore on May 12th, 2008
When I grew up the term “game console” was virtually unknown. I grew up when the NES was king, and back then those machines were simply called video-games. The were primitive, clunky, rather expensive and I wanted one badly. Unfortunately for me, there were no video-games in our house.
Since then I have obviously grown up. I was ten years old in 1988, and for the last twenty years I have become less and less interested in game consoles, while the consoles have grown more and more powerful. In fact, I’d say that the consoles of today resemble full-fledged computers more than those primitive ancestors of yore.
And now is why I’m going to wonder why us who prefer PC-gaming has to wait in favor of the consoles.
See, the original Xbox when it arrived back in 2001 was essentially just a PC in a more manageable case. It had a harddrive, it had essentially the same kind of CPU as in most budget-computers, it had a graphics circuit which was essentially a GeForce3, and it had a network card. The new 360 and PS3 are even more powerful, and are essentially computers in a neat package.
Today it’s unheard of to release a game for consoles exclusively, since the PC gaming market is as huge as it’s ever been. Yet we have to wait for games, for seemingly no other reason than an artificially introduced one.
I’ve been looking forward to GTA4 since I first heard it announced. But it seems I’m going to have to wait until October simply because I don’t own a 360 or a PS3. Why? It doesn’t make sense to me. It can’t be THAT difficult to port a game to the PC, especially since they managed to release two versions of it for two different platforms at the same time. The 360 and the PS3 are (I imagine) as different from each other as they are to a PC, yet no PC version is forthcoming until fall. When GTA: San Andreas was released it was the same thing. In that case it was even worse; the PS2 version came almost a full year before the PC version. Why?
Mass Effect is another example. For the 360 it was released in November 2007, yet it has taken six months to make a version for the PC. That version will be released the 28th of this month.
I strongly doubt that there’s a technical reason for not releasing games for the PC at the same time as the consoles. So why do companies do it? Do they just do it out of spite? Or is it that they have to put tons of (in my opinion) useless DRM/Copy protection schemes into the game, and this is what takes six months or more?
But to me as it stands right now, it doesn’t make sense.
License
This work is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 Sweden License.
May 12th, 2008 at 08:10
I’m impressed that you can’t see the red line in this. First, all those games are single player games, the most copied games out there on PC. Call Of Duty 4 is a multi-platform game with focus on Online play and thus, came for all platforms pretty much at the same time.
Copying of games is a REAL problem on PC. This is the reason they postpone the games to be released on pc. You just have to live with it, or get a console. There is no human right for you to have the game at the same time as everyone else. Statistics show that a game released on several platforms (for instance, Ps3, crossbox and PC) always sell a lot less on PC then the other consoles. Why is that? Pirating.
It is reasonable to think that at least a percentage of the ones downloading the game on piratebay aren’t going to buy the game once they have played it once, singelplayer games have a short lifespan and has almost no replay value.
This will be the norm in the future. either get a console or just live with it, they make the games and decide when to release and where. Pirating need to be dealt with or pc gamers will watch their platform die (or just live with RTS games)
May 12th, 2008 at 14:55
Again, I think you’re full of bullshit. Piracy is just as rampant on consoles as it is on the PC, especially with DVD-burners and media being practically free. There is no “magic bullet” that automatically makes consoles less vulnerable to piracy than PC - there was back when consoles used ROM-images rather than discs to store their games since they are much trickier to copy.
But look at any filesharing network today and you will see that versions of a game for consoles will be traded just as frantically as the PC-version. That’s why I don’t really believe your “theory” that it’s piracy and copyright infringement that scares the publishers. When Bluray-burners become cheaper, then that media too will start being pirated.
“Live with it or get a console”. Ah, what an insightful view on life. Never question anything, just be another corporate whore who buys stuff mindlessly? Well, it seems to work for you so of course that’s what you’re going to recommend everyone else to do.
As for your second comment, I unapproved that because you’re just being an asshole there. Of course, that’s pretty much the norm for your activities on the ‘net but none the less I found it to be a new low mark even for you.
May 12th, 2008 at 17:36
You are both wrong, and right. Hahaha!
No, but seriously though, I think you both miss each others points. In my experience, Henka often gives out information he has read somewhere and does not realise that people take that information, be it correct or not, as Henkas personal opinions or arguments. I realise you both rub each other the wrong way but none of you is as stupid or bad as the other thinks. Just saying, I like you both in their own way. So, Isecore, please do not judge him too fast, and Henka, well, learn to god damn express yourself less clumpsy, you get misinterpreted all the time. For instance “There is no human right for you to have the game…” is copied straight out of the mass effect forum. =)
May 12th, 2008 at 18:20
We all copy games and “There is no human right to have the game” is more true then you will admit. PS3 has yet to have a single pirated game, and crossbox has a chip for it’s DVD reader, a chip that still get you banned from Xbox live for the rest of you consoles life.
May 12th, 2008 at 19:04
the PS3 pirating scene is still in it’s infancy. The reasons for it isn’t that it’s not possible, but simply that Bluray-burners and media are still more expensive than just buying the damn game.
As for the 360/Xbox, that seemingly doesn’t do much to prevent piracy since I see a very long list of games over at the Pirate Bay. So, if it was such a bullet-proof deterrent, then why is that list so long? Either people don’t care, or they’re cheap, or whatever. I don’t care WHY people copy games or software, there’s as many reasons for that as there are users.
My original question was why do games come for consoles faster than for PC? So far, the argument of piracy holds very little water in my opinion.
So go ahead, blind me with some insightful thoughts that you copied from some obscure fanboy-forum somewhere. I really don’t give a shit either way any longer.
May 12th, 2008 at 21:12
If not piracy then money. They make A LOT more money out of consoles. In average 7.5 games per x-box and (at this moment) 3.5 for PS3. MS is interested in making games exclusive on their console and pay a lot of money for it. Mass effect is an example.
Xbox copying is not as easy as you believe, even tried it? RROD will kill your console in a year anyway and why void the warranty with a chip? Or just get your live account terminated because of a bad rip? They got ways to detect that even with a modchip (which really is just a firmware for the DVD reader), as for the technical explanation of that, just google it. PS3 has yet to even get ONE SINGLE GAME ripped OR released (and readers is cheap, relatively), is that not interesting for developers making 20-30 millions dollar investments in games?
before commenting on piracy on consoles, read up on it dude. I have and I know of the risks.
To burn games on a BD for Ps3 is just the minor obstacle, there is yet to be a modchip or similar device to allow unsigned code to be run.. or anything made outside sony factories. Remember sony got hard lockdown on both BD readers and writers.
Gone are the days of 300 sek chips for X-boxOne and PSTwo.
Go out and buy a couple games, stop pirating them (I know you do) and support the developers instead of complaining. Then you might have a valid reason for your irritation.
May 12th, 2008 at 21:21
“before commenting on piracy on consoles, read up on it dude. I have and I know of the risks.”
See, this is why people don’t like arguing with you online. Because you automatically assume that everyone else doesn’t have the slightest clue what they’re talking about and that you’re the one true fountain of knowledge. I have a fair bit of knowledge of the workings of both the original Xbox, the 360 and the PS2/3, yet you assume I’m some kind of moron.
So, as far as I’m concerned you can howl in the wind until your head pops off. I don’t care any longer about anything you have to say about this or really any topic on technology.
And as for accusing me of pirating games, then wow. You’re really going to go ahead and call the kettle black? As if you’re some kind of fucking saint, going around with your halo promoting goodness and fairness. You’re the hypocrite here - not me.
May 13th, 2008 at 08:00
Calm down, boys! You both have some valid points, but you also both have flaws.
Henka, you have no idea how long it took for me to get you. You repeat information you’ve read as it were your own thoughts (I know I have made myself quito of that too in the past, but that is no excuse), and it drives people up the walls! Especially since it often seems like you are arguing for both sides, and people will only get angry about the bits that is against them AND your own previous arguments. Have a thought of your own, make up your mind and get some solid arguments for that opinion! It will get you further.
Isecore: remeber how young Henka is. He is just trying to keep up with you lot that has so much more experience than him. Try to forgive him and think of it as his nature.
Also, piracy IS huge. And there IS a lot of people that would have bought games/music/films if they could not get it for free online. The companies sees this and panics. It’s only understandable. But when they try and stop it only to cause trouble for gamers (like having to wait for the PC-version, or getting it with a rootkit), that is when I say they went to far! It is not after all affecting pirates, it is affecting the paying customer.
May 13th, 2008 at 08:00
quito=guilty
=D
May 17th, 2008 at 20:44
Isecore as you said, consoles nowadays are nothing more but easy to use PCs in flashy cases. In the good ol days you had to buy a console to play the cool games. Simply because consoles technically were far ahead of PCs. And because PCs wasn’t as common as today..
Fast forward to todays date, why should I buy a Console if PCs are so alike ? One of the reasons (as always) is to be able to play all the cool games before the other guy.
So in my opinion this is one major thing that keeps the consoles alive.
In short: Console makers are in bed with the Game makes
May 17th, 2008 at 21:14
Styrbjörn: well, of course the game-makers are in bed with the console-maker
No big surprise there. In fact, some of the game-makers ARE also the console-makers. Microsoft owns a shitload of different game-producers, as do Sony.
Everything in order to make sure our money is funneled in the right direction.
Sure, I understand that to play the newest games you need to own the newest console. What I oppose is the fact that nobody ever questions it. Everyone just buys the console rather than wondering WHY something is.
May 17th, 2008 at 22:43
An old Run DMC song comes to my mind: “Because its like that, and thats the way it is.”
Sure you can question it all you want, but in the end of the day the game creators will release the games as they see fit (to maximize profits off course). The only thing you really can do is to avoid buying the console games, and buy the games when they eventually turn up to PC.
It´s simple economics really, and yes i sucks !
May 17th, 2008 at 22:44
i=it
=)
May 17th, 2008 at 23:14
Yes, we are all slaves (or supposed to be) under the corporations. You’re completely free to choose whatever you want, as long as you choose something that a corporation will profit from. A sad society indeed.
May 18th, 2008 at 00:15
“The were primitive, clunky, rather expensive”
I don’t believe the NES was primitive. It was able to produce smooth-scrolling platform games in 1985 with Super Mario Bros, while the PC was able to do this first at the end of 1990 with Commander Keen.
The NES clunky? It was a while back i saw one in real life but I don’t believe they are that big. In this picture: http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y259/miketurner1/Picture.jpg is doesn’t seem super-sized compared to a Gamecube (which is a very small machine).
Back in 1990, a NES had a price around $125 ( source: http://boards.ign.com/classic_console_gaming_general_board/b5138/2949349/p1/?6 ), not much compared to a ps3 ( $499 ).
“And now is why I’m going to wonder why us who prefer PC-gaming has to wait in favor of the consoles.
See, the original Xbox when it arrived back in 2001 was essentially just a PC in a more manageable case. It had a harddrive, it had essentially the same kind of CPU as in most budget-computers, it had a graphics circuit which was essentially a GeForce3, and it had a network card. The new 360 and PS3 are even more powerful, and are essentially computers in a neat package.”
Yes, the setup in a Xbox is similar to that of a PC. But it is ONE setup. The developers has the same CPU to work with, same amount of RAM, same Graphics Card and so on for every Xbox owner. There is not some Xboxes with AMD processors and some with Intel, some with different graphics card, some with unusual sound cards – which is the case with PC’s.
It all comes down to that there are only one or two variations of a setup to work with, not thousands.
It also seems more effective to release the game later for PC, when everyone who has worked on the console versions are done and can focus on the PC port. There must be huge cost savings not to have a team working only on the PC version.
And I do believe that if the game would be released for PC at the same time you wouldn’t buy it. You’re just angry that you can’t download it and play it.
May 18th, 2008 at 00:46
Whatever. Apparently I can’t voice an opinion without having every single person on the net jump on me to point out how wrong I am and how poorly I write stuff. All I wondered was if there was any good reason for games to be released so much later for the PC than consoles, and instead I find myself embroiled in some stupid flamewar about crap I have no interest in, as well as being accused of all kinds of stupid things.
From now on I’m only going to write about flowers and weather, what I had for dinner and other neutral shit.