Why are modern consoles bad?
- Thread starter Arnoxthe1
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think most of the problems with modern consoles is they don't have enough setting them apart. The technical aspects are completely irrelevant to the average user, and the game libraries are like 90% cross-platform. This ultimately ends up making console choice almost entirely a matter of which handful of exclusives you like
Yeah, I don't know about the Xbone, but I put a game in my PS4 and I'm playing within 2 to 3 minutes. Yes, patches improve a game, but the lack of them doesn't make any game I've played unplayable. Certainly not for the duration it takes for that patch to download.
No, consoles aren't as simple as they used to be, which isn't too much of a surprise seeing as technology has advanced. The internet is more complicated than a television set as well. The consoles we have now still provide the simpliest way to experience the best graphics current technology has to offer.
But I guess it's bad and rotten because the PC audience says so.
No, consoles aren't as simple as they used to be, which isn't too much of a surprise seeing as technology has advanced. The internet is more complicated than a television set as well. The consoles we have now still provide the simpliest way to experience the best graphics current technology has to offer.
But I guess it's bad and rotten because the PC audience says so.
People have been saying it for years though, especially this gen as games now take up massive amounts of spac, meaning far longer download and install times.inu-kun said:
That seems like a very shortsighted opinion, or at least only focusing in the declining AAA market.
Splitscreen and same screen games are just fine. There are literally dozens of games in Steam that let you play competitive or cooperative on the same screen with other people, and most are available on consoles too. If anything, the focus on indie games has increased the offer tenfold compared to the last generation.
I am growing tired of the complain about patches. Sure, depending of your Internet speed you may have to wait some minutes (only) the first time you put a new game in, but you know what happened before when a game didn't run, you encountered a progression-breaking bug, or you lost your save? Jackshit. You just swallowed your rage and started over or bought the game again, with the hope it will be different this time. If you were lucky, and the developer gave half a shit, it would recall your game or your console and you had to ship it (at your own cost, of course) to the other side of the world so that they might fix it or send you a replacement next month. So excuse me if I think being bothered with downloading a couple hundred megs every so often doesn't sound like such a big deal...
For all the talk about "master race", PC doesn't get it much better. You still have to download the 40+ GB of a modern game plus driver updates to even see the menu screen.
I do think having almost the same catalogue with the same quality across all options somewhat dilutes the choice of a modern platform (PC, PS4 or XB1) but, in the end, that is positive for the consumer. Choose what you want, 90% of the content is available everywhere. The only real loss is bragging rights, if that is what you are into.
Splitscreen and same screen games are just fine. There are literally dozens of games in Steam that let you play competitive or cooperative on the same screen with other people, and most are available on consoles too. If anything, the focus on indie games has increased the offer tenfold compared to the last generation.
I am growing tired of the complain about patches. Sure, depending of your Internet speed you may have to wait some minutes (only) the first time you put a new game in, but you know what happened before when a game didn't run, you encountered a progression-breaking bug, or you lost your save? Jackshit. You just swallowed your rage and started over or bought the game again, with the hope it will be different this time. If you were lucky, and the developer gave half a shit, it would recall your game or your console and you had to ship it (at your own cost, of course) to the other side of the world so that they might fix it or send you a replacement next month. So excuse me if I think being bothered with downloading a couple hundred megs every so often doesn't sound like such a big deal...
For all the talk about "master race", PC doesn't get it much better. You still have to download the 40+ GB of a modern game plus driver updates to even see the menu screen.
I do think having almost the same catalogue with the same quality across all options somewhat dilutes the choice of a modern platform (PC, PS4 or XB1) but, in the end, that is positive for the consumer. Choose what you want, 90% of the content is available everywhere. The only real loss is bragging rights, if that is what you are into.
Modern games are a lot more complex than yesterday's 2D sprite and early 3D games so patches and optimization issues come with the territory. Now, these patches download in the background so I don't know why they are a big deal. I remember in the olden days, even with very simple games, they would often glitch out or have game breaking barriers b/c of shitty programming. And when a game was broken it stayed broken. Now there is atleast a way to fix a game.
Also without the marketing force of consoles in general I doubt we'd see many AAA games. Gaming companies have a huge interest in their market share and I doubt PCs alone would compensate. Consoles are also primarily used to promote and advertise games with partnerships making these games possible. No companies have a vested interest for PCs to sell well other than the companies that provide components but they have no stake in game development.
Consoles are easy to use, have huge market share and install base and are backed by corporations that drive AAA game development. I mean, if PCs are so great, why would MS invest heavily into xbox when they already have shitty windows? They could simply promote the game for PC right? Besides as a device to play games on consoles will remain important for marketing reasons. You don't innovate or invest when you don't have a product(or subscription service like paid online) to sell. Hence why PCs will never take over consoles.
Also without the marketing force of consoles in general I doubt we'd see many AAA games. Gaming companies have a huge interest in their market share and I doubt PCs alone would compensate. Consoles are also primarily used to promote and advertise games with partnerships making these games possible. No companies have a vested interest for PCs to sell well other than the companies that provide components but they have no stake in game development.
Consoles are easy to use, have huge market share and install base and are backed by corporations that drive AAA game development. I mean, if PCs are so great, why would MS invest heavily into xbox when they already have shitty windows? They could simply promote the game for PC right? Besides as a device to play games on consoles will remain important for marketing reasons. You don't innovate or invest when you don't have a product(or subscription service like paid online) to sell. Hence why PCs will never take over consoles.
Split screen I would say is a problem with the games themselves. I was AMAZED that Battlefront has offline splitscreen, but I really shouldn't be.
Plug-in-and-play, not actually too sure. The last time I bought a disc was back in May, and I can't remember anything about install times and such.
Everything else, ehhh.
Consoles are still way more convenient than PCs. No need to fiddle around with INIs, hunting down driver updates, trying to find that one setting that is assfucking your frame rate. Is it a better experience though? Well, that might be the most subjective thing in the world. A person who plays one game and only that game? Console. A guy who has some free space and cash to burn? PC. A 13 year old kid who wants to land some dank n0sc0pes? Console. A tech enthusiast? PC. Different strokes for different folks.
I wouldn't say they are bad. I would say they are disappointing, for sure. But until the eve of technology so advanced, we won't even need physical input to control games anymore, consoles will always have a place in the gaming industry.
Plug-in-and-play, not actually too sure. The last time I bought a disc was back in May, and I can't remember anything about install times and such.
Everything else, ehhh.
Consoles are still way more convenient than PCs. No need to fiddle around with INIs, hunting down driver updates, trying to find that one setting that is assfucking your frame rate. Is it a better experience though? Well, that might be the most subjective thing in the world. A person who plays one game and only that game? Console. A guy who has some free space and cash to burn? PC. A 13 year old kid who wants to land some dank n0sc0pes? Console. A tech enthusiast? PC. Different strokes for different folks.
I wouldn't say they are bad. I would say they are disappointing, for sure. But until the eve of technology so advanced, we won't even need physical input to control games anymore, consoles will always have a place in the gaming industry.
I'd say the one area in which PCs definitely excel is backwards compatibility. Espescially with old consoles breaking and becoming obsolete. And PS3 runs like a snail compared to PS4. I can understand why PS4 can't run PS3 games what with the cell processor and all but this actually makes me a big fan of remasters and incremental hardware upgrades. The only old games I still want to play is only a handful anyway.
Consoles are bad? Huh, funny, I must've completely imagined iterative design for Elite Dangerous courtesy of a 9Gb update today which is only capable with "modern consoles", with the best game pad I've ever used (the Elite, and no - no relation to Mr Dangerous), on a system and UI that can evolve, and support mods [for Bethesda games] for the first time ever.
As a gamer who started gaming in the mid/late '80's, oh, how I long for the eras of worse graphics, offline systems/IP's, and shittier game pads. Wait, no I don't...
But hey, this is the symbolic home of the Master Race itself, so the whining and grousing at consoles is like playing to the crowd. I've no idea why patches and day1 updates are viewed with such scorn. I mean, can't people wait a few minutes? Maybe go make a cup of tea? Put the bins out? Do some impromptu yoga? If a game's been updated or patched it'll boot fast enough ergo 'plug and play' just becomes, er, 'play' or sit'n'play.
And if something - like a game or system update - takes a few hours, so what? Has there been a collective bypass of attention spans in the last few years? Are people incapable of waiting for anything these days?
Consoles may inevitably be left behind by evolving tech and how digital media's consumed, sure, and I certainly take issue with the specs both MS and Sony felt were adequate for the XB1 and PS4 - ditto with my skepticism as to whatever the hell they're hoping to achieve with the Scorpio and Pro. Exclusivity wars also hurt the medium's integrity and growth, I'd argue, and that problem doesn't appear to be buggering off any time soon.
But right now, and since the 360 era? Consoles have been far from 'bad'. They've been pretty fuckin' awesome.
As a gamer who started gaming in the mid/late '80's, oh, how I long for the eras of worse graphics, offline systems/IP's, and shittier game pads. Wait, no I don't...
But hey, this is the symbolic home of the Master Race itself, so the whining and grousing at consoles is like playing to the crowd. I've no idea why patches and day1 updates are viewed with such scorn. I mean, can't people wait a few minutes? Maybe go make a cup of tea? Put the bins out? Do some impromptu yoga? If a game's been updated or patched it'll boot fast enough ergo 'plug and play' just becomes, er, 'play' or sit'n'play.
And if something - like a game or system update - takes a few hours, so what? Has there been a collective bypass of attention spans in the last few years? Are people incapable of waiting for anything these days?
Consoles may inevitably be left behind by evolving tech and how digital media's consumed, sure, and I certainly take issue with the specs both MS and Sony felt were adequate for the XB1 and PS4 - ditto with my skepticism as to whatever the hell they're hoping to achieve with the Scorpio and Pro. Exclusivity wars also hurt the medium's integrity and growth, I'd argue, and that problem doesn't appear to be buggering off any time soon.
But right now, and since the 360 era? Consoles have been far from 'bad'. They've been pretty fuckin' awesome.
To sell you double the products.stroopwafel said:
Microsoft views Windows as... I don't even know anymore. Its not a gaming platform, they've made that clear. Its not a business software - too many design choices recently have just impeded on business needs to follow Apple. I guess maybe they view it as a mobile platform? They're trying to put it on their phones after all.
Basically, Windows, the only part of the PC Microsoft sells you, they just view as a generic platform for everything. Its why they really ran into trouble with 8; they tried to unify PC, console and mobile platforms onto one OS, and didn't design each specifically for what it should be. People noticed, big issues, queue free Windows 10 for everyone, even pirates.
Now, regardless of whether you play games or not, you will own a PC, and if you own a PC, most of the time its Windows. These days Mac is gaining more ground, but businesses and gaming are still mostly focused on Windows [Naturally depending on the business], and a lot of home computers are Windows computers as they're cheaper than Macs. So, Microsoft has already sold you that.
Now, they could develop a game, and only publish it on the computer. You'd earn some game sales. However, they've already sold you the OS, so there is no more incentive for you to buy Windows at that point.
Now, MS designs a console, the Xbox, and dedicates it to gaming. They then create a bunch of exclusives for it, that you can't even play on the PC [Halo Franchise after the original being a low hanging fruit for this]. Now, this is ingenious to make you buy more Microsoft stuff.
Maybe you brought Halo and an Xbox to start with, because you like consoles, and back then they were still more plug'n'play than today, and easier to use. But maybe you didn't. Great, they've already got your sale. Maybe you brought it for PC, and loved it. The next one is Xbox exclusive. What are you going to do? You don't need an Xbox. You don't want an Xbox. But if you want Halo 2, you have to get an Xbox. There you go, Microsoft has now sold you a console, and more games.
Why do you think first party titles from MS were still Xbox exclusive, even though more money could be gained from selling them on PC too? Because it drove Xbox sales. Funnily enough, this has always been a big part of consoles; Why do Sony not publish their exclusives to the PC? Because if they did, a fair portion of their audience wouldn't need to buy a Playstation anymore. Games sell consoles. If there are no exclusive games, console sales would plummet. There is some native console market, but MS and Sony work to grow that market and create barriers to exit.
Also, ITT: People who last played PC games 20 years ago commenting on how hard it is to get them to run. Times have changed. PCs are as plug and play as consoles these days. Once you've got your game, you shove it in, run a quick install, and start playing. Patches exist for both, firmware updates exist for both, and messing around with files is something you haven't had to do outside of modding or really trying to push the limits of your game for decades. Hardware incompatibility is also pretty low, unless your PC is ancient. Funnily enough, PC gaming has been becoming easier and easier over the last few decades, even as consoles added more and more barriers. Are they exactly the same yet? Not quite, but they're getting pretty close. It ain't like the old times, despite many people trying to insist the opposite.
It's so nice of you to speak for everyone.inu-kun said:
Space is an issue and buying additional hardware to store your games even when you buy physical is also a problem. Waiting a day to play the game you bought is indeed a problem. No we haven't regressed, we have always been able to play a console game within minutes of opening it, until last gen and this gen is even worse.
The reason for that is the Adults Only rating is handed out pretty much exclusively for sexually explicit content, so games that get that rating are essentially classified as porn. The only two games I can think of that got the AO rating for something other than sexual content are Manhunt 2 (which got censored to get it down to an M rating) and Hatred which got the AO rating for extreme violence. Gamestop doesn't want to install an isolated porn section in their stores or be given the reputation of being a smut peddler so they don't sell AO rated games. The R18+ rating in Australia is essentially the equivalent to a hard M rating in the US, and even then some games that get an M rating in the US get refused classification in Australia unless they are censored as apparently your moral guardians get really triggered if there is any hint of rape in a game.Gordon_4 said:
I don't think that works, since there's only one of your PC, unless all of your friends also have perfect copies of your PC.BabyfartsMcgeezaks said: