The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

I haven't been able to get a console due to lack of room for a TV since the PS2. I've found that I have really only missed replaying some games. Most of the console exclusives haven't sold me on any console. This coming generation just sounds like trying to sell a dream machine that just gives you nightmares. I actually got a free Xbox 360 from my mom's boyfriend's brother when he moved. All it has is the power cord. It's currently sitting upside down on my floor because I found out to stream Netflix on a Xbox 360 you had to be a Live Gold subscriber. I said screw that since all it was going to do was be used by my grandfather to watch westerns on occasionally. Wish I got a PS3 instead.

As someone that grew up with an original NES it is pretty sad to see the state of things these days. I can now say things that start with "back in my day" about gaming. Blockbuster is almost dead because of streaming and Redbox. Soon you won't be able to rent games it seems. You won't be able to play your old console games with the quality of the parts in them. It will be interesting to see if 360s get to a point where used ones are rare enough for them to go for more than they originally were worth. Sorry, sort of rambled on there. Pretty much I'm just happy I like the games for PCs and I have a good PC. Maybe now we can stop dumbing down games so they can be on consoles too.

Woodsey:

Doom972:
How many PC gamers actually continuously upgrade their machine? It's expensive and pointless. I'm a PC gamer and have friends who are also PC gamers and I never witnessed this phenomenon.

A lot of people tend to rather over do the amount of problems they're going to face on a PC. The amount of times I see console players list "drivers" specifically as a reason for avoiding PC gaming is baffling.

Drivers?

You mean, the things you download off most manufacturer sites with a "click here to auto-detect" button, install and restart?

The things that take five minutes to update?

THAT'S why people are avoiding PCs?

Uh.

...

Um.

Hyakunin Isshu:

And secondly, he's wrong on every point. From games being more expensive to create, to "we always had backwards compatibility back in my day" He is mostly wrong.

I think you need to see what this guy said;

Anti-Robot Man:
the concept isn't "new" to gamers it's been around for 3 decades (longer than many gamers have been alive!): the Atari 7800 could play games for the 2600 (1980s), the Mega Drive/Genesis could play Master System titles (1980s again), most of the GameBoy line has had backwards compatibility (1990s-2000s). The Wii could play GC games and use it's peripherals, the PS2 was fully compatible with PS1 titles. The 360 was compatible (through emulation) with about half the Xbox library, and the first gen PS3s were backwards compatible. And of course PCs can play practically everything ever with a bit of work.

The only major breakpoints in the past were when a format change took place (sometimes not even then): i.e. different shaped cartridges or the move from cartridge to disc. The current gen doesn't have that excuse given that blu-ray drives are fully compatible with DVDs/CDs (not even a change there for Sony) and digitally downloaded games get round the format problem entirely.

I don't think backwards compatibility on the Xbox One would've been overly expensive to implement (especially compared to investments like the mandatory kinect and paying the NFL $400,000,000), even if done through hardware. I'm pretty sure all they would've needed to add was the processor from the 360, which has to be very cheap for MS by now. This would've benefited everyone, including Microsoft because people would've continued to buy downloadable titles from the current gen, especially in the first few years of the next console when titles will be thin on the ground and many developers continue to produce games for the massive consumer base of 360/PS3 owners (which likely also benefits the Wii U).

im sure the Commodore C64 titles could play on the C128. if you want to add that top the list

lacktheknack:
You mean, the things you download off most manufacturer sites with a "click here to auto-detect" button, install and restart?

The things that take five minutes to update?

If your OS just doesn't do it as a matter of automatic system update...

ms401:
>PC GAMING
>EXPENSIVE

BWAAHHAHA WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU JUST SAID NIGGA

LEARN TO BUILD

A PC IS CHEAPER THEN A PS3

LEARN
TO
BUILD

I know you're probably going to get banned, but this is now one of my favourite posts on the Escapist forums. Thank you.

Hyakunin Isshu:
Lord! I don't even know where to start with old Ben Croshaw! For One thing, he keeps boxing in Sony with Microsoft, as if Sony is going to ever block used games. Sony said they won't! Get your facts straight. Sony may or may not do something about used games in the future, but they didn't say anything yet, so stop attacking them, as if they did!

And secondly, he's wrong on every point. From games being more expensive to create, to "we always had backwards compatibility back in my day" He is mostly wrong.

In other words, we really, really, *really* need new consoles, for a fresh new start and for new ideas to be made. Period.

P.S. about that stupid Bertha, what if Bertha got Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U instead? If Bertha wanted to play Mass Effect 1 or 2, then.... well then you would need a PS3/360 to play them all, wouldn't you?

How does one platform change ruin his Assassin's Creed example?

Like... at all?

It's unfortunate that Mass Effect only has 3 on a Nintendo console, but's it's equally as unfortunate that Assassin's Creed DOES have the previous games on the previous console but they can't be played on the new one.

And of those two situations, guess which is easier to fix?

Also, about the new ideas that consoles would allow... so far, I hate all of them. That's a bad sign, don't you think?

I agree strongly with you, Ben, in that I was really hesitant about joining the PC gaming community due to the seemingly insurmountable obstacle of the, well, "community". But it seems in the last handful of years or so (with the rise of games that can play exactly like their console counterparts with an xbox 360 controller on PC and local co-op on PC) a new generation of PC gamers is rising that's friendly and accessible.

I am part of that generation and soon you will be too. While the tired stereotype of the guy who HAS to have a Core I7 (overclocked to 90000 thz or something) with 3 GTX Titans (also overclocked) so he can get 100+ FPS on Crysis 3 running on 9 monitors at 4k resolution each and will undoubtedly complain LOUDLY if it ever drops below 60 FPS may still be here (I already see one in this thread, not naming any names), it seems those of us who are perfectly willing and happy to handhold newcomers to help our community grow and be a positive one is growing.

I'm in it.
My friends are in it.
My brother's in it (just converted him in a nice, friendly way as opposed to yelling "NOOB" and calling him a console-scrub).

Soon you will be in it. Let's overpower the old generation and usher in an era of happy, helping PC Gamers as opposed to the kind that will laugh at you if you're running anything less than the aforementioned rig.

rofltehcat:
PC gaming may be more expensive in the short run but in the long run it is much cheaper.

Actually I would say Steam sales make PC gaming MORE expensive XD you end up spending more than you would've cuz you keep thinking "BUT I CAN'T PASS UP THIS DEAL!"

this is only partially exaggerated :P

lacktheknack:

Woodsey:

Doom972:
How many PC gamers actually continuously upgrade their machine? It's expensive and pointless. I'm a PC gamer and have friends who are also PC gamers and I never witnessed this phenomenon.

A lot of people tend to rather over do the amount of problems they're going to face on a PC. The amount of times I see console players list "drivers" specifically as a reason for avoiding PC gaming is baffling.

Drivers?

You mean, the things you download off most manufacturer sites with a "click here to auto-detect" button, install and restart?

The things that take five minutes to update?

THAT'S why people are avoiding PCs?

Uh.

...

Um.

Yeah, exactly. Pops up 4 or 5 times in any given thread on the subject. Saw someone list the process of installing a game as a problem the other day. Not the time it takes to install, but the process of clicking 'next' a few times. Then there's the stuff where people seem to think they break down every 5 minutes.

And the funny thing is that ever since I heard the term (I think it was on 4chan) I've agreed with it - unironically, since I didn't know the origin of the term.

I've always seen consoles as silly. Pay extra just to be able to play online? What? I already pay for my internet connection, why pay double? Plus I could never figure those controlers out - give me a mouse and keyboard any day. Wait up to ten years for a hardware upgrade that doesn't even really catch up to modern standards? Sure...

"Who actually prefer games that are temperamental to get running and that have complicated keyboard interfaces, just because it discourages new or 'casual' players who will in some way taint the entire community with their presence."

That has got to be a VERY small number of PC gamers. Many PC gamers are actually multi-platform gamers, who also own at least one console. I grew up on console but now prefer the PC b/c I am adult with only so much time for games and I don't want to have to buy a separate device just for games. I already do everything else on PC so doing my gaming there is a natural fit.

I also don't think there are nearly as many issues getting games to run, especially today with services like Steam, GOG.com installers, and Windows 7 as a platform. It is very rare that I run into any kind of issue getting something to run, provided I meet the stated requirements.

In any case I have always been open to the idea of getting a console again but nothing I saw the PS4 of Xbox One tempted me in the slightest.

So part of the Glorious PC Gaming Master race I shall stay.

EDIT: The whole "complicated keyboard interface" thing is just what you are used to. I have seen console only gamers become at least competent on keyboard and mouse controls, having never used them, in a matter of a couple hours. Like so many things it is just a matter of getting used to it.

Yellowbeard:

Doom972:
How many PC gamers actually continuously upgrade their machine? It's expensive and pointless. I'm a PC gamer and have friends who are also PC gamers and I never witnessed this phenomenon.

I agree. A good $1000 rig will last for years with, at most, a new video card and an extra hard drive.

A decent $1000 rig should, with a little care and TLC, outlast a console gen by far.

Woodsey:

lacktheknack:

Woodsey:

A lot of people tend to rather over do the amount of problems they're going to face on a PC. The amount of times I see console players list "drivers" specifically as a reason for avoiding PC gaming is baffling.

Drivers?

You mean, the things you download off most manufacturer sites with a "click here to auto-detect" button, install and restart?

The things that take five minutes to update?

THAT'S why people are avoiding PCs?

Uh.

...

Um.

Yeah, exactly. Pops up 4 or 5 times in any given thread on the subject. Saw someone list the process of installing a game as a problem the other day. Not the time it takes to install, but the process of clicking 'next' a few times. Then there's the stuff where people seem to think they break down every 5 minutes.

<headdesk headdesk headdesk>

Fun fact: In the last five years, I've had to troubleshoot THREE games, and one was for problems that were present on the console version (Dammit Fable 3!). Dark Souls fixed ITSELF by letting it sit for an hour. My other PC gaming frineds have had to fix NO games in the last while.

Not to mention that Steam reduces the clicking to "would you like to install this?" -> "yes".

Graaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

When was it that you used that picutre Yahtzee? Was it 2007 or 2008? Whatever year it was, arguing over who is "smarter" or more "intelligent" for using a different platform is just as retarded now is it was then.

Microsoft isn't really doing a goob job with the Xbox One, but then again that's just good for Sony and Nintendo. Free market and all that jazz.

I will say that while you can build a gaming machine for relatively cheap, you'd be talking about a machine that would quickly become outdated after a few years as well as one that would not typically allow for peak settings in today's game. But, it could absolutely play today's games as well as tomorrows games for a few years on lower settings.

If you want to do it right and have a pc that will last as long as the consoles do, I'd recommend putting in the extra hundred bucks. If you know computers well enough to put them together (beware, it is a steep learning curve but worth knowing) then you can put a high-range pc together for around $1,000 if you wait for deals on components. The $700 machine is more of a mid-range but is all you really need if you're not a graphiophile.

My views on gaming platforms are identical to Yahtzees, as described in the article. I've been an XBox 360 man since launch for the convenience of the games working out of the box (among other reasons), while using my definitely-in-no-way-a-gaming-laptop laptop for indies on Steam and oldies from GoG. The past few days, reading up on the frothing mass of disappointment and doom that has been the Xbone reveal so far, there came a point (pretty early on, actually) where a switch was flipped and I mentally threw my hands up and declared "Fuck that noise". I can get a gaming rig- an upgrade from my almost decade-old laptop that will be like night and day- and have my ninety-two-strong Steam library, as well as my future buying options, intact. Besides, I don't even like sports.

Those kind of people have a pc in the same with other have cars. They want to mod it up, make it faster, louder etc My thoughts are, whats the point in spending all that money just to play the handful of games that need a rig that powerful? An even when they port those games to the 360, like Crysis 2 and Far Cry 3 - the gameplay is still the same. FC3 was good fun, but C2 was crap.....but certain people seem to take graphics over game play.

Also even when a developer brings out a shitty game like Aliens CM, gamers will mod it to make it look better. But why? Now i think modders do some amazing stuff, but they shouldnt need to patch games. I would rather just not buy the game than have to look and hope modders have fixed it. Isnt that just allowing developers to release buggy games?

I like Steam, its great for gaming, i just use it for older games like xcom. I wish they would have worked with MS. Cheaper games are good for every body and i guess there sales are like console gamers buying used. I know there is a steambox in the works, but i dont know who they are aiming to sell it to. PC gamers wont buy it, console gamers will get those games anyway and i doubt non gamers will waste money on it. Unless Steam box is something like an app on a smart tv?

But as ive said to many people. Consoles are for gamers who enjoy playing games. PC's are for people that want top of the range graphic, high def and 60fps (as in gaming isnt the primary reason).

It is interesting reading people talking about cost of parts and what parts to get. But for me personally, building a pc just for gaming isnt worth it as i mostly rent games. But for those that like buying, collecting and building up a huge catalogue of titles that they will replay in 10 years time. Then PC is the way to go as its BC. Especially now as console exclusives are getting very thin on the ground when you compare it to the exclusives the PS2 had.

I stopped reading at "Xbone". Resorting to such annoying slang comes across as amateurish

SonOfVoorhees:

But as ive said to many people. Consoles are for gamers who enjoy playing games. PC's are for people that want top of the range graphic, high def and 60fps.

I can't play console games anymore. The shitty 30FPS and below are horrible. I see flickering, lines, and it makes me nauseous. I need the FPS to be at least 40 for my eyes and brain.

So games at 60FPS are awesome, and smooth. Plus I dont feel like throwing up

Y'know, maybe it's a tech enthusiast thing, but I've never understood why crowing about what your PC can do with it's hardware is important.

Surely there's much, much more to PC gaming than just the shiniest graphics?

The massive back catalogue, the ease of independent development and distribution - and therefore the flourishing of creativity and innovation, the easy availability of technical support, the relative user-friendliness compared to even five years ago, the multi-purpose nature of the thing?

Hearing gamers repeating the (true) industry problem of focusing on high-end shiny graphics and how such things are unnecessary, and then in the same breath crowing about how their PC can handle these high-end shiny graphics so well seems a little, well, hypocritical. These probably aren't the same people speaking, but that's how it seems to me.

Much as I can admit, as both a console and PC gamer, that PC is objectively the better platform by now; having the obnoxious 'elitist' attitude that implies 'you shouldn't be permitted to play vidyagaems unless it's on a PC' is a poisonous and unnecessary attitude to have. I think that's what we mean when we refer to 'PC elitists'.

Yeah, I had already come to this conclusion not long before this article. I have been a console gamer all my life. I was always of the mindset that it would be far too expensive, complicated, and invasive. I held on because PC's lacked local multiplayer. Now all of those things are applying to consoles anyway. With my recent introduction to steam, I'm starting to think gaming is going to have to go back to where it all began: PC.

Lightknight:
I will say that while you can build a gaming machine for relatively cheap, you'd be talking about a machine that would quickly become outdated after a few years as well as one that would not typically allow for peak settings in today's game. But, it could absolutely play today's games as well as tomorrows games for a few years on lower settings.

The important metric here is how PC's and consoles stack up against one another, now how well PC's and their games scale. That "mid-range" desktop PC nowadays will put you on rough parity with the next-generation consoles' graphical capability -- take a look at how little RAM these next-generation consoles have, for example, and tell me they're going to be a serious competitor.

If you care about graphics, load times, and responsiveness.

Nicely said Yahtzee. as a true grizzled veteran of PC gaming I know the hll that it has been. Yes I bare the scars of he who has run a setup and had to figure which of the sound cards in th list could match the one you have. I know the rage of someone who has cursed who ever said 1Meg of conventional memory was more than enough. I have sacrificed at the dark alter as I shuffled TSR's out of High Memory, Upper Memory and more in order to queeze one more Kilobyte of CM to run my newly purchased game. Truth be told I kinda miss those days.

These days; PC gaming is very easy as long as you don absolutely need to play every game with the settings dialed up to 11. News flash, if you have time to notice muddy textures in an FPS, the game designer failed. You should be too busy dodging missiles to notice stuff like that.

You're right in that the PC has the Ultimate Backwards Compatibility. I played curse of the azure bonds just two days ago and had a right fun time. Emulators expand on this even further and thanks to GoG and steam we have access to these lovely relics of the past. Oh sure many are crap by today's standards but still not without the charm that made them so fun in their prime.

My biggest curiosity is what is guiding MS's decision. The whole no used/rented games thing is gonna seriously reduce the uptake in 2nd and 3rd world markets. The XBone will never sell as many units as the 360 or even the original Xbox because there are just fewer people that meet the requirements. This can only mean that ms intends to make up for that lost revenue with nickle and dime microtransactions and in game adverts.

Akalabeth:
I stopped reading at "Xbone". Resorting to such annoying slang comes across as amateurish

It's a fan nickname, and it's going to stick. Especially since (unlike "spunkgargleweewee") it's almost intuitive how the portmanteau was created, and I am sure as heck (I am so classy) that even if the community thought this was the second coming, it would still come up with it, albeit using it in a more affectionate manner.

As for OT, well, Yahtzee, what can I say, I can't wait for your tomorrow's rhymes.

Doom972:
How many PC gamers actually continuously upgrade their machine? It's expensive and pointless. I'm a PC gamer and have friends who are also PC gamers and I never witnessed this phenomenon.

I do a major upgrade to my pc about once every 5-7 years. Not really that often and I am always able to run things smoothly on the highest settings. It is kinda funny how people think pc gaming is a type of money sink when they have spent more money on an xbox this generation than i did on my pc.

Heck if you payed $399 + tax, payed for Xbox live the past 6 years your cost just for the system is around $750 without even touching game prices.

With that said I own all consoles as well and find myself using them a lot less than my pc these past 4 years.

Yahtzee Croshaw:
The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race

Yahtzee contemplates the potential fallout from elitism in PC and console gaming.

Read Full Article

I thought for SURE you'd finish this up with something a reference to this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueQlVlkF6p4

No, I don't like Joni Mitchell's voice... Sue me =P

Akalabeth:
I stopped reading at "Xbone". Resorting to such annoying slang comes across as amateurish

Well, somebody's awfully defensive. It wasn't us that picked a name for the blasted thing that's not only confusing, but the inevitable shorthand for which sounds derisive.

BrotherRool:

1337mokro:

Emulators.

The current consoles are nothing but cheap PC's who should all be able to run emulators. There is no reason why a console that runs on a version of windows is unable to run a fucking emulator.

Anyway welcome back Yahtzee. We kept your can of spray on tan and blond wavy hair wig safe in anticipation of your return. Now with our powers combined we can form the Master Gaming Zord and crush the peasant rebellion.

The current consoles are pretty darn far way from cheap PC's that's part of the problem, because the architecture is so twisted emulating is seriously hard.

To give you a level of the scope of the problem, we haven't actually managed to successfully emulate PS2 games yet. it's almost there but after years of work and roughly 10x the hardware. Emulating PS3 and 360 games may be a decade off yet. Unless your console has a PC hardware layout (like the PS4 and One) then you need an insane amount of power to emulate a console with relatively weak stats.

Whilst that is true we also have to keep something else in mind. These are all emulators made by people working from the outside in. It basically involved designing simulated consoles that run the same as the physical ones. A program made by the people with direct access to the very design documents might find someway to make a better working version.

Although with things like the PS3 the problem is quite clear. The goddamned Cell architecture. However the 360? That should not be such a big deal for the people that made it or heck if they wanted to they could hire hackers and coders from the community to build an emulator for next to nothing compared to professional techmonkeys.

Dexter111:

I'm also looking forward to 4K monitors coming up and you can't stop me!

My god man, you only need two or three monitors, four thousand is just over the top!

-Insert Chorus of cheering applause- This entire article has summed up what i've been thinking since the xbox one announcement.
I will say it again: I NEVER thought that the ones who would turn me away from consoles and towards PC gaming would be the ones selling the consoles.

GAunderrated:
I do a major upgrade to my pc about once every 5-7 years. Not really that often and I am always able to run things smoothly on the highest settings. It is kinda funny how people think pc gaming is a type of money sink when they have spent more money on an xbox this generation than i did on my pc.

A lot of people also forget that once you get set up, there are a lot of components that needn't be replaced or upgraded. You don't need a new monitor, tower, power supply, cables (if you're so inclined), speakers, input devices, operating system, hard drive, or other peripherals every time you upgrade. The only components you need to upgrade regularly are your CPU/motherboard, RAM, and graphics card -- that stuff can be bought incrementally and still runs cheaper than buying a console every generation if you know what, when, and where to buy.

All that's before you factor in the PC paying for itself in the difference in price between console and PC games. Really, if the next generation of consoles live up to their respective announcements, there is no reason left to stick with consoles if you're a serious gamer.

One thing that doesn't get covered enough regarding PC gaming is overall utility. I'll forego the discussion of being more expensive, as that fact is at best arguable. The main difference is that a gaming PC is also used for everything any other computer is for. You can use it for school, work, browsing, tv, music, gaming, or anything else. Consoles are trying to do that now but they are literally decades behind and have inferior controls for most of the tasks. Anyone who argues a controller is better than a keyboard for web-browsing, for example, needs beaten with a haddock.

Eacaraxe:

Lightknight:
I will say that while you can build a gaming machine for relatively cheap, you'd be talking about a machine that would quickly become outdated after a few years as well as one that would not typically allow for peak settings in today's game. But, it could absolutely play today's games as well as tomorrows games for a few years on lower settings.

The important metric here is how PC's and consoles stack up against one another, now how well PC's and their games scale. That "mid-range" desktop PC nowadays will put you on rough parity with the next-generation consoles' graphical capability -- take a look at how little RAM these next-generation consoles have, for example, and tell me they're going to be a serious competitor.

If you care about graphics, load times, and responsiveness.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, no. Consoles are optimized in entirely different ways than pc's. The same specs you see in a console do not line up with a pc tower containing the same hardware. There is architecture in those boxes that really is next-gen technology despite the hardware being average. So you're likely looking at a mid-high range equivalent.

That being said, is there much of a difference between mid and mid-high? Not really. All that matters is that the consoles are finally back in the race graphically and that'll mean that us PC gamers can start using our hardware for more than bragging rights.

Once we see the price we'll also know the relative cost between one machine and another. All I know is I took extra time and waited for the right sales and now all I have to do is slap in another video card to bridge to my first one when the graphics go up. After that, I can bridge a third.

SonOfVoorhees:
Those kind of people have a pc in the same with other have cars. They want to mod it up, make it faster, louder etc My thoughts are, whats the point in spending all that money just to play the handful of games that need a rig that powerful? An even when they port those games to the 360, like Crysis 2 and Far Cry 3 - the gameplay is still the same. FC3 was good fun, but C2 was crap.....but certain people seem to take graphics over game play.

Also even when a developer brings out a shitty game like Aliens CM, gamers will mod it to make it look better. But why? Now i think modders do some amazing stuff, but they shouldnt need to patch games. I would rather just not buy the game than have to look and hope modders have fixed it. Isnt that just allowing developers to release buggy games?

I like Steam, its great for gaming. I wish they would have worked with MS. Cheaper games are good for every body and i guess there sales are like console gamers buying used. I know there is a steambox in the works, but i dont know who they are aiming to sell it to. PC gamers wont buy it, console gamers will get those games anyway and i doubt non gamers will waste money on it. Unless Steam box is something like an app on a smart tv?

But as ive said to many people. Consoles are for gamers who enjoy playing games. PC's are for people that want top of the range graphic, high def and 60fps.

There are nice, lightweight things you can do with even a cheap PC that you can't on an X Box. Like update your resume and retouch a photo. And while you can surf the net, can you edit a wiki or send an email to someone's gmail account? I also enjoy playing games and none of those things in your last sentence are important to me, they just happen to be 10 years or older because there's so recent few titles that interest me. Then again, maybe I'm just a grumpy old man who has a serious case of rose-colored glasses.

lacktheknack:

Hyakunin Isshu:
Lord! I don't even know where to start with old Ben Croshaw! For One thing, he keeps boxing in Sony with Microsoft, as if Sony is going to ever block used games. Sony said they won't! Get your facts straight. Sony may or may not do something about used games in the future, but they didn't say anything yet, so stop attacking them, as if they did!

And secondly, he's wrong on every point. From games being more expensive to create, to "we always had backwards compatibility back in my day" He is mostly wrong.

In other words, we really, really, *really* need new consoles, for a fresh new start and for new ideas to be made. Period.

P.S. about that stupid Bertha, what if Bertha got Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U instead? If Bertha wanted to play Mass Effect 1 or 2, then.... well then you would need a PS3/360 to play them all, wouldn't you?

How does one platform change ruin his Assassin's Creed example?

Like... at all?

It's unfortunate that Mass Effect only has 3 on a Nintendo console, but's it's equally as unfortunate that Assassin's Creed DOES have the previous games on the previous console but they can't be played on the new one.

And of those two situations, guess which is easier to fix?

Also, about the new ideas that consoles would allow... so far, I hate all of them. That's a bad sign, don't you think?

1. My point is: Ben Croshaw is trying to make this into a black & white situation. Them vs us. Evil vs good. It's more gray then that. ("Only a Sith deals in absolutes" -Obi-Wan ;) )

2. Nes, Snes, N64, Gamecube and many, many more consoles didn't have backwards compatibility. Heck, My brother sold the Nes before I could ever get to play Megaman 4, 5, or 6. So I got bigger problems then backwards compatibility. Like not able to play my old console at all. And you know what? Some of my old games won't play on the newer windows! Want to play X-COM? Well too bad! because now you have to re-buy them from a site all over again! 'Why should I re-buy? I payed for it once!'

3. When talking about Halo 4, Ben Croshaw seemed to have a problem with it being a '4'.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/10063-How-to-Title-Your-Stupid-Sequel
What the Heck?! But whatever his dumn point was, doesn't it go for the other games as well? Like playing Final Fantasy VII, Resident Evil 4, Megaman X4, Megaman 7, MGS4, or Dune 2 for the first time without playing the games before? If you really want to play the other games that came before, then won't you need a way to play the old games? Like getting the old consoles? I can't see why Ben Croshaw is acting like this is a new thing! If you started Assassin's Creed by playing Assassin's Creed IV, then it's your own fault for buying a game that has a *4* in it. Either buy the old consoles, or wait for Assassin's Creed 5.

4. About the 'new ideas', what I meant was now we may see new and old genres coming back. Like RTS, 4X, Simulation and more. There was some great games on this Gen that couldn't have *never* been made for the Last-Gen, like Red Faction: Guerrilla, Dead Rising, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, From Dust, Hydrophobia, Half-Life 2, Portal 2 and many more. Just think of all the crazy new gameplay ideas we can do in the Next-Gen!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here