---

Originally posted by dbstylin34 Undead labs class 4 will be a zombie mmo for the xbox 360, although they are bringing out there XBLA title "state of decay" first, I think we are in for a bit of a wait before developers realize the potential for a console mmo dude.

---

I've heard about that, and I'm looking forward to it. I'm sure I'll pick up State of Decay (Class 3) when it comes out.

Originally posted by blognorg

 

---

Originally posted by gordiflu

---

Originally posted by blognorg  

---

Originally posted by gordiflu Consoles have been hindering and slowing down technology progress in computer games already for a few years. They are also partially responsible for many computer games getting dumber, easier and shorter. Specially shorter. MMOs have also been getting dumber easier and shorter as an indirect result of this mindset change in gamers and developers. Console MMOs will only accelerate the process, with newer MMOs beeing limited by console's inferior hardware. I actually wish all console gaming failed big time, so we could have superior PC games. Unfortunately I am aware this won't happen. Beta was superior to VHS. Minidisk was superior to CD. You get the idea, don't you.  

---

    Wow... just wow. This argument again? If it not for the consoles, the gaming market would be much, much smaller; ergo, there would less money in the industry, and less money spent on technology advancement. Not only that, but even if you were right and consoles did nothing but hinder technology, there would still be a roof (not far from where we currently are). High-end computer hardware is expensive, both to manufacture and for consumers to buy. And the market for it wouldn't be big enough on its own without the software support driven by consoles. So no, it wouldn't be a super-happy gaming future without consoles. Not to mention that games are getting crazy-expensive. We're advancing too quickly as is, and developers can hardly keep their doors open because of development costs. Your argument stems from a microscopic view of high-end PCs being more powerful than consoles at the end of their cycle, and somewhat hindering graphical fidelity. However, most games which are multi-platform are designed to go beyond consoles... like all of them. I have a solid gaming PC and there are games that I can't run at max settings. For some reason, people seem to think that graphical advancement stops for the duration of each console cycle. It doesn't. Just compare any launch game with a game now. Secondly, I really dislike the "dumbing down" phrase. It's usually just used by people who don't like something, but can't come up with any reasoning as to why. And the fact that you're blaming consoles for the "dumbing down" of a, nearly exclusive, PC genre is hilarious. There are plenty of "deep" games around, but you have to think about how much larger the industry is now. Games, as a whole, used to be pretty niche; and the fact is that you're not going to be able to market a ridiculously complicated game to a mass audience. It's always been that way. The only reason complicated games migrate to the PC is because of the installed base. Back in the 90's, during the PC boom, people realized that they could make almost any kind of game and instantly have some kind of audience. They didn't need mass appeal, because there are infinite-million people with PCs. It's not due to some mystical dumbing down pattern. Lastly, games shouldn't be needlessly complicated. They should be designed to fit the intended experience. Many times "deep" mechanics just bog down the game or feel out of place, and senselessly increase the learning curve. Rainbow Moon is a perfect example of this. There's nothing wrong with a game that's inherently simple, and this elitist attitude that there is, irritates me. There are still plenty of over-complicated games out there, so there's no need to complain about the contrary. The notion that console gamers can infect the glorious PC master race is pretty laughable.

---

Star Citizen´s extremelly successful crowdfunding campaign, openly saying that it's going to be computers only, and not any computer but a beast of a computer, invalidates pretty much all your wall of text.

---

 

 

Um, no. No, it doesn't. You're talking about one game, one plot point, the exception. There's also the possibility that it wouldn't have existed without consoles. You've clearly missed my point entirely, which is not uncommon with people whom share your opinion. The gaming industry wouldn't be where it is today without consoles. Not to belittle Star Citizen (as I'm actually a supporter), but I wouldn't classify it as 'extremely successful'. Successful for what it is, yes, but it's still just a niche game. And how many supporters were first introduced to gaming via consoles; probably many. You're not seeing the big picture; you just seem to be an elitist who likes to condemn those whom don't think as you do.

If we follow your logic, MMOs (and any online game for that matter) wouldn't exist without PCs. No console was able to support that type of games when the first ones appeared. I guess you see the flaw in your argument.

Fact is, hardware on computers is superior, and has always been. Fact is, PC games offer more stuff than console ones and have always done. You can especulate as much as you fancy with your "what if"'s, but the facts are the facts.

Originally posted by killahh
There's a reason the us gov uses ps3's slaved yo make supercomputers.

And that reason is likely that Sony very heavily subsidized them making one for PR purposes, as happens with a lot of supercomputers.  Notice that you never hear what hardware companies like Google or Facebook use internally.  You rarely find out what hardware a company is using if it isn't subsidized for PR.

Originally posted by BadSpock

I want an MMO specifically for consoles - not a 3rd rate port from the PC version (just like PC gamers (which I am too) very much hate the 3rd rate console ports).

It's always easy to tell if a game was made for PC then ported to console or vice versa.

I want an MMO specifially made and designed exclussively for console from a AAA dev studio.

-Fully optimized engine/network code for the platform (identical hardware is a + here)

-Integrated voice chat - I may be a MMO veteran but I'm sick of text box chat in MMOs or having to use Vent/TS

-Fully optimized control scheme

And yes, I've hooked my PC up to my TV and played with Mouse/Keyboard and yes I've hooked up a game controller and tried both first party game support (TERA) and 3rd party controller support (WoW) and if the game isn't designed for controller 100% it's just clunky.

And an extra high price tag to compensate for the console maker taking a large cut of the revenue.  And very slow patching times, even for game-breaking bugs, because everything has to be approved by the console maker.  There are compelling reasons why very few MMORPGs make it to consoles, and those aren't going away.

Originally posted by Gishgeron

   Finally, you will NEVER have a time where PC gaming is superior.  The trouble with PC gaming is that there are entirely too many possible hardware configurations.  The hardware market refuses to standardize in an intelligent way.  So when developers sit down to make a console game, they already know what ever user is working wth and can maximize THAT setup for optimal playability.  PC game creators have to consider everything on the market, from what is popular NOW to what was popular 5 years ago to what the average "non-computer-savvy" user might buy from Best Buy.  I'm a living example of why PC gaming fails.  I have a really nice laptop.  I can play most things on high settings.  However the particular video card I have is exactly ONE which seems to have issues with how Minecraft is dealt with inside Java and I cannot play that game without crashing constantly.  Yes, I have looked up every possible solution.  No, none of them worked.  I even tried a few solutions of my own before finally looking up my specific video card and reading about how many people had similar issues.

A time when PC gaming is superior?  Such as, oh, say, today?  Or any other time in about the last 15 years or so, for that matter.

As for standardization, ever hear of OpenGL?  How about DirectX?  The standards are there and are very broadly used.  It would be helpful if game makers were to better communicate what the real system requirements for their games are, though.

As for glitches, yeah, there can be odd bugs like that.  Sometimes it's actually an issue where there is a bug in the code, but some video drivers are able to handle it and make the code work right anyway.  For an example of this, in a project I'm working on, some of my fragment shaders set a vec4 equal to a vec3.  My desktop was able to figure out that what I meant was the first three components of the vec4 should be the three components of the vec3.  My laptop was able to figure out the same thing.  My parents' desktop, on the other hand, was not, and crashed.  Once I figured out to explicitly tell it to set the first three components of the vec4 equal to the vec3 I gave it, it worked.

You want one? This april you've got one. Defiance, pixel perfect shooter MMO on PC, PS3 and Xbox.

Trion spent over 80 million dollars on it, which is a lot more than they spent on Rift, and considering Rift has had great success, things are looking up.

Originally posted by gordiflu

Originally posted by blognorg

 

---

Originally posted by gordiflu

---

Originally posted by blognorg  

---

Originally posted by gordiflu Consoles have been hindering and slowing down technology progress in computer games already for a few years. They are also partially responsible for many computer games getting dumber, easier and shorter. Specially shorter. MMOs have also been getting dumber easier and shorter as an indirect result of this mindset change in gamers and developers. Console MMOs will only accelerate the process, with newer MMOs beeing limited by console's inferior hardware. I actually wish all console gaming failed big time, so we could have superior PC games. Unfortunately I am aware this won't happen. Beta was superior to VHS. Minidisk was superior to CD. You get the idea, don't you.  

---

    Wow... just wow. This argument again? If it not for the consoles, the gaming market would be much, much smaller; ergo, there would less money in the industry, and less money spent on technology advancement. Not only that, but even if you were right and consoles did nothing but hinder technology, there would still be a roof (not far from where we currently are). High-end computer hardware is expensive, both to manufacture and for consumers to buy. And the market for it wouldn't be big enough on its own without the software support driven by consoles. So no, it wouldn't be a super-happy gaming future without consoles. Not to mention that games are getting crazy-expensive. We're advancing too quickly as is, and developers can hardly keep their doors open because of development costs. Your argument stems from a microscopic view of high-end PCs being more powerful than consoles at the end of their cycle, and somewhat hindering graphical fidelity. However, most games which are multi-platform are designed to go beyond consoles... like all of them. I have a solid gaming PC and there are games that I can't run at max settings. For some reason, people seem to think that graphical advancement stops for the duration of each console cycle. It doesn't. Just compare any launch game with a game now. Secondly, I really dislike the "dumbing down" phrase. It's usually just used by people who don't like something, but can't come up with any reasoning as to why. And the fact that you're blaming consoles for the "dumbing down" of a, nearly exclusive, PC genre is hilarious. There are plenty of "deep" games around, but you have to think about how much larger the industry is now. Games, as a whole, used to be pretty niche; and the fact is that you're not going to be able to market a ridiculously complicated game to a mass audience. It's always been that way. The only reason complicated games migrate to the PC is because of the installed base. Back in the 90's, during the PC boom, people realized that they could make almost any kind of game and instantly have some kind of audience. They didn't need mass appeal, because there are infinite-million people with PCs. It's not due to some mystical dumbing down pattern. Lastly, games shouldn't be needlessly complicated. They should be designed to fit the intended experience. Many times "deep" mechanics just bog down the game or feel out of place, and senselessly increase the learning curve. Rainbow Moon is a perfect example of this. There's nothing wrong with a game that's inherently simple, and this elitist attitude that there is, irritates me. There are still plenty of over-complicated games out there, so there's no need to complain about the contrary. The notion that console gamers can infect the glorious PC master race is pretty laughable.

---

Star Citizen´s extremelly successful crowdfunding campaign, openly saying that it's going to be computers only, and not any computer but a beast of a computer, invalidates pretty much all your wall of text.

---

 

 

Um, no. No, it doesn't. You're talking about one game, one plot point, the exception. There's also the possibility that it wouldn't have existed without consoles. You've clearly missed my point entirely, which is not uncommon with people whom share your opinion. The gaming industry wouldn't be where it is today without consoles. Not to belittle Star Citizen (as I'm actually a supporter), but I wouldn't classify it as 'extremely successful'. Successful for what it is, yes, but it's still just a niche game. And how many supporters were first introduced to gaming via consoles; probably many. You're not seeing the big picture; you just seem to be an elitist who likes to condemn those whom don't think as you do.

If we follow your logic, MMOs (and any online game for that matter) wouldn't exist without PCs. No console was able to support that type of games when the first ones appeared. I guess you see the flaw in your argument.

Fact is, hardware on computers is superior, and has always been. Fact is, PC games offer more stuff than console ones and have always done. You can especulate as much as you fancy with your "what if"'s, but the facts are the facts.

My logic is that online games wouldn't exist without PCs? Um... I guess that's a possibility, but I'm not really sure what you mean by referring to that as my logic. Regardless, I never said that PCs haven't contributed to gaming, nor have I said that they are inferior to consoles. In terms of hardware, they objectively have more potential. My point was, and still is, that consoles have have contributed to the advancement of gaming as a whole, and they shouldn't be thought of as "holding the industry back". As much as you'd like to believe, graphics wouldn't be better now if consoles hadn't existed. Ignoring all of the economic reasons, there would still be a limit to what the consumer is willing to pay, the costs of manufacturing, and simply the advancement of tech. The only instance in which consoles can be thought of as a remedial component of gaming is the narrow-minded instance where a multi-platform game panders to the consoles. That can pinned on the devloper on an individual level, though.

Originally posted by evemaster00

You want one? This april you've got one. Defiance, pixel perfect shooter MMO on PC, PS3 and Xbox.

Trion spent over 80 million dollars on it, which is a lot more than they spent on Rift, and considering Rift has had great success, things are looking up.

Thanks for the info and the stastic. That's crazy. It sounds vaguely familiar, but slipped under my radar for the most part.

I would love a console mmorpg (specifcally mmorpg). I haven't tried any of the available ones yet (or games in similar style), so I wonder how communication works. If its over voice chat, not sure I'd like that so much unless there was a punishment system for abusing it. Such as running around with your music playing. Would be kind of cool to have your voice masked to sound like your character would too. 

Totally off topic, but I HATE that stupid moving Avatar. It's distracting, has very poor looping and its a stupid poop face too.

Originally posted by blognorg

Originally posted by evemaster00

You want one? This april you've got one. Defiance, pixel perfect shooter MMO on PC, PS3 and Xbox.

Trion spent over 80 million dollars on it, which is a lot more than they spent on Rift, and considering Rift has had great success, things are looking up.

Thanks for the info and the stastic. That's crazy. It sounds vaguely familiar, but slipped under my radar for the most part.

They've kept it quiet until now, new year now and the lead up to launch, the hype is only going to grow from here.

Beta signups are already live at the Von Bach industries website, with the first beta event weekend in just 15 days from now.

What's more is it has sandboxish elements, it does not have classes and allows a great deal of character progression and customisation. It does have instanced pve dungeons for those that enjoy that, but also open world pve and open world pvp. Overall i'd call it more of a hybrid. And it's a shooter! You have to play it like an FPS, and aim, there is more player skill involved.

There's some good videos of it from E3 on youtube.

Originally posted by gordiflu.

If we follow your logic, MMOs (and any online game for that matter) wouldn't exist without PCs. No console was able to support that type of games when the first ones appeared. I guess you see the flaw in your argument.

Fact is, hardware on computers is superior, and has always been. Fact is, PC games offer more stuff than console ones and have always done. You can especulate as much as you fancy with your "what if"'s, but the facts are the facts.

  No, his point about consoles saving video games is 100% true, at least in so far as it pertains to the large market and not things like solitare.  Back in the 80'S the market was suffering largely and most investors were about 3 seconds from packing up and leaving it entirely.  While plenty of people wanted to play games, they tended to be very young and had parents who simply did not want to spend the high price for entry.  It was Nintendo's foray into that market, with the NES, that brought investor attention back into it in a meaningful way.  It's success broke open the possibilities of the gaming market and with it came a great deal of interest. 

  Now at this same time the PC world was coming into its own sort of milestone.  Computers were still FAR from being in even a quarter of american homes.  But interest was growing, and advances in technology were bringing them to a point where they could do more and cost less.  They also started taking up less space, which is a pretty important thing.  Video games already existed, at this time, for computers.  They were often educational things, or very small time things.  Large scale, serious gaming, came later and its entirely because Nintendo proved to investors that money was there to be made.  Without that interest we'd be left with a very indie development field.  While we all enjoy a minecraft or FTL I think we also all realize that for every one Octodad there are moutains of crap you have to wade through to get to them.

  PC gaming is just a headache. You need to invest over grand every 5 years to stay ahead of the curve and ensure you can play every available game.  Then you need to learn plenty of tech stuff to keep it running optimally over that time.  Or you can buy a console for 350$ (1st gen, new release) and enjoy the same 5 years without worrying about a single thing.  Your example of how PC gaming offers more, in terms of mods and content, will be rendered moot soon enough when Valve enters the market through Steambox.  If anyone understands how to give stuff to gamers, its Valve.

There's a couple hurdles to overcome with console though.  The tech lags behind pc for one.  And then I prefer mouse and keyboard to controller.

If they could resolve those issues, sure, I'd love to be playing an mmo on my 60 inch 3d tv.

Originally posted by Terranah

There's a couple hurdles to overcome with console though.  The tech lags behind pc for one.  And then I prefer mouse and keyboard to controller.

 

If they could resolve those issues, sure, I'd love to be playing an mmo on my 60 inch 3d tv.

HDMI cable and a GPU with a hdmi slot, which is most new fairly high end GPU's. You can mirror the PC onto a TV screen quite easily.

Originally posted by evemaster00

Originally posted by Terranah

There's a couple hurdles to overcome with console though.  The tech lags behind pc for one.  And then I prefer mouse and keyboard to controller.

 

If they could resolve those issues, sure, I'd love to be playing an mmo on my 60 inch 3d tv.

HDMI cable and a GPU with a hdmi slot, which is most new fairly high end GPU's. You can mirror the PC onto a TV screen quite easily.

 I've actually been meaning to do that.  I work the next couple of days, but I think after that I'll give it a go.  I know my ati hd 5850 has an hdmi slot.

Originally posted by Ginaz
Putting hardware and PC vs Console arguments aside, one of the big factors limiting MMOs on consoles is the strict control Microsoft and, to a lesser extent,  Sony exert on what they allow on their systems.  Its the reason why Dust 514 won't be available for XBox 360.

Besides, we all know what Microsoft is really up to http://www.extremetech.com/computing/115003-microsoft-quietly-kills-off-the-desktop-pc !!! Dont we!!!

Lets see, dumbed down MMO's, more console controlled games.... I say, give it 5 years :-D Hewlett Packard is no longer producing desktops http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/08/18/hewlett-packard-to-computers-drop-dead/

Guess its time to get with the program! Why mmos wont be what some of us want them to be on a PC. Technology is killing them off! Glad I own a PS3! Dust514 is alot of FUN!

Originally posted by Ginaz
Putting hardware and PC vs Console arguments aside, one of the big factors limiting MMOs on consoles is the strict control Microsoft and, to a lesser extent,  Sony exert on what they allow on their systems.  Its the reason why Dust 514 won't be available for XBox 360.

That's an intersting point. I hadn't actually thought about that. I had just assumed that Dust 514 was a Playstation exclusive because they paid to have it that way. Microsoft and Sony do that kind of crap all of the time; just look at the Skyrim situation. Not quite an exclusive, but still, kind of a petty thing to do. I wouldn't buy for the Xbox despite them.