Oh look, yet another "PC Master Race" article, that got some traction with ReviewTechUSA.
Hey there everyone, Happy Gamer here, and I make it no secret that I'm not a fan of PC gaming. I don't care about all the "benefits," and I'd rather just play my PS4, XBOX ONE, and everything before it. When ReviewTechUSA did a video on this article talking about the benefits, I decided to counter them.
1. "You can play games with better graphics than console - if you have a powerful gaming PC." I don't have a powerful PC, and my PC that costs more than my consoles doesn't provide better graphics than my console. I have to turn down the graphics to below 720 to get a smooth frame rate.
2. "The Steam Game Platform." Steam sucks. It never wants to load on my PC. I also avoid digital as much as I can (even on consoles), because I like physical. I'm a collector, and a digital library will never be a "collection." You say sales "steam sales," I have "store clearance" and "used games." And as a physical gamer, I never have to worry about "this game is off the marketplace, you can never play it now."
3. "You don't have to pay to play multiplayer games on PC, and you save money in the long run." I don't play online games. I play games to avoid people, not interact with the lowest of the low. I actually quite dislike how EVERYTHING has online components now adays.
4. "There are more games for PC than there are for game consoles." Quantity does not equal quality. How many 3rd party exclusive games were there for the Wii? Hundreds probably. How many of them were good? Maybe 10. Most of the good games get console releases, and many exclusives like MMOs and RTSs just aren't my thing. If there's an exclusive like trade winds, I'll get it, but that's not enough to convince me to drop a grand on a PC.
5. "You can download 'mods' for games, which can add fun new content or better graphics." Mods don't interest me. I get the appeal, but I don't care. Next.
6. "You have the freedom to choose how you play on PC." I prefer gamepads, that's all. I don't care if it's a NES, SNES, PlayStation, XBOX ONE, Gamecube, or even the OG XBOX Duke controller. I like gamepads, and I've been using different ones for so many years they all feel natural to me. There are some games that are better with mouse and keyboard, such as roller coaster tycoon or sim city, but otherwise, I'll use my XBOX ONE controller; just like on my console.
7. "You have the choice to play games on feature-packed monitors or your TV." Good for you, but I'm good with my 4:3 CRT or 16:9 LCD. Most games I play have the action that's right in front of you. I don't need this ultra wide field of view.
8. "You're not hogging the TV if you live with someone else." I'm the only one that uses this TV, my parents have their own TVs. This doesn't matter to me. Next.
9. "Building your own PC is fun and satisfying." I don't care how many times you tell me "it's fun," I HAVE ABSOLETELY NO DESIRE TO BUILD A PC! I REALLY hate this argument. You may think it's fun, but I don't. If anything, this is an argument against PC gaming. I hate troubleshooting simple problems that result from expertly built electronics. I REALLY don't want to troubleshoot problems a novice like me created.
10. "And you can decorate it to make it truly yours." Again, not my thing. However, if it is your thing, you can also do that with consoles. I've seen equally cool custom console skins and lights.
11. "And you can go all-out with custom water cooling, too." Even you admit water cooling is tedious. I admit it's a cool novelty, but I prefer to keep my electronic components far away from liquids.
12. "You can upgrade your PC parts to keep up with new games, while console parts become "obsolete" very quickly." And the double edge sword that stings harder than "console obsoleteness" is that you have to worry about your cutting edge capabilities. If I buy a game for my PS4, I know it's going to work on my PS4, plain and simple. I don't have to worry about compatibility and specifications. If the game disk say "xbox one," it's going to work on my xbox one.
At least you didn't bring up the tired "well I can use my PC for all sorts of other things" argument, one I hate just about as much as the "building a PC is fun" argument, but just because it's a straw man in most cases. Yes, your $1500 gaming PC is very capable, and can do lots of things a console can't. But here's the real question, what are you using your PC for? Unless you're doing some serious media rendering or simulation programs, you have ABSOLUTELY NO need for a $1500 PC outside of cutting edge gaming. My dad recently started using a $200 chrome book for all his web browsing and light word processing through google docs. He says "I have no need for a windows based PC, all I need is internet." The only reason I bought a PC instead of a chrome book is because I wanted to do video editing and light gaming. "My PC can stream video," so can my consoles. "My PC can play music, DVDs, and Blu-Rays," so can my console. "My PC can do video chat," so can my console. "My PC can computer can program mods." Are you programing mods? "No, but it can simulate a complex manufacturing environment in 1 hour." Are you doing those simulations? "No, but it can surf the web." So can my console. "Well, my PC can do my taxes." You got me there, but my $300 tower from 8 years ago can do that too.
Look, if you like PC gaming, good for you. It's your opinion. I'm not going to try to convince you to give up your preferred platform. But it's just that, an opinion. It's not "fact" like many try to claim. This has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and console peasant for life. Bye.
Showing posts with label PC gaming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PC gaming. Show all posts
Friday, August 4, 2017
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
PC games on XBOX ONE is not what you think
Steam will never come to consoles. Never, ever.
So I was watching AlphaOmegaSin's video about PC games being able to be streamed to XBOX ONE soon, and he says some bold statements about PC streaming on consoles. Here's the original video.
The big thing he said was "will Sony release a Steam app to compete with XBOX?" The short answer, no. The short reason, competition. Now for the rambling.
A steam app to play steam games will NEVER come to dedicated hardware, plain and simple. Sorry, it just will never happen, because steam is the competition. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, and maybe OUYA/Nvidia all sell games through their online marketplaces. If you have the option to buy a game through steam or the XBOX Live market place, and you get more bang for your buck from Steam and Microsoft gets nothing from the deal, then they're losing a sale and it's not in their best interest to offer that service. Console manufacturers make all their money in game licensing and typically sell the hardware at a loss of close to cost (I think now they're sold with like a 1% mark up, but that's not enough to keep a division alive). We once had consoles where the manufacturers made their profit off hardware, it was the 3DO, and it failed miserably because the consoles were $700 or more alone. It would be the same as Sony adding the XBOX LIVE marketplace to the PS4, or Pepsi delivering Coke in their trucks, or EA selling their games through Steam.
And for you PC elitists that say "nu uh, PC is not in the same league as console gaming," that may be true from a consumer stand point, but to a company that sells videogames through a digital marketplace, anyone who also sells games through a digital marketplace is competition. If you wanted a game and you had the option to either pay $2 for it through steam on sale or through PSN for $20, you're going to get it through steam, and Sony won't make any money off the deal since it's a completely different service. Even Sony and Valve worked out some kind of deal where Valve paid a 3% licensing fee to Sony for every game sold through steam through the PS4 steam app, Valve will just raise the price through Steam for PS4 by 3% to cover the costs. NO, lord Gabben is NOT being "super pro-consumer" because it's cheaper on PC, he's just being a smart business man because valve is making the same on every sale regardless of PC or PS4. You might get something like uplay for Wii U where you can get all your uplay achievements for ubisoft games you bought for Wii U, but you can't buy ubisoft games through the uplay app and all games you bought through uplay can't be played on the Wii U.
And if you're wondering "how are PC games streamed to XBOX ONE?" I'm pretty sure that the PC games that you can stream are the ones available through the Windows store, and only the ones through the windows store. They aren't steam, they aren't GOG, they aren't Amazon games, or any of those services. These are games you buy directly from Microsoft, so as far as Microsoft is concerned they're getting your money one way or another, and they don't care so long as they get it. I think this was mentioned at E3. You won't be able to play steam games, you won't be able to play GOG games, you won't be able to play amazon store games, you will just be able to play Microsoft store games.
Now the last argument you may have is the different video streaming services available on consoles even though you can buy movies and TV shows through XBL and PSN, well that's because the primary objective of XBOX and PlayStation is not to sell movies and TV shows, it's to sell games. Sony and Microsoft want you to buy their hardware so you will buy their software (games). Streaming services like netflix, hulu plus, Amazon Instant Video, and the like were originally added as incentives to get you to buy their hardware over the competition, and it's still the same today (I could get the games I want on either PS4 or XB1, and XB1 has more streaming services I am interested in, I think I'll get an XB1). Now you buy an XBOX 1, Microsoft makes a little money on that, and then you buy the games where they make all their money. If you could buy the games through Steam, then Microsoft only makes a few pennies on the sale of the hardware.
And if you pay close attention, only STREAMING is available on console. On PC you can download Amazon and Vudu videos to your hard drive in addition to streaming, but you can ONLY stream Amazon and Vudu on consoles. You can only download movies and TV shows if you buy them through XBL or PSN. But once again, the XBOX and PlayStation are gaming machines that can stream video. If they let the competition eat into their primary food source, then they're just going to be all the more hungry and eventually starve to death.
Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and 3rd party game marketplaces will never come to first party hardware.
So I was watching AlphaOmegaSin's video about PC games being able to be streamed to XBOX ONE soon, and he says some bold statements about PC streaming on consoles. Here's the original video.
The big thing he said was "will Sony release a Steam app to compete with XBOX?" The short answer, no. The short reason, competition. Now for the rambling.
A steam app to play steam games will NEVER come to dedicated hardware, plain and simple. Sorry, it just will never happen, because steam is the competition. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, and maybe OUYA/Nvidia all sell games through their online marketplaces. If you have the option to buy a game through steam or the XBOX Live market place, and you get more bang for your buck from Steam and Microsoft gets nothing from the deal, then they're losing a sale and it's not in their best interest to offer that service. Console manufacturers make all their money in game licensing and typically sell the hardware at a loss of close to cost (I think now they're sold with like a 1% mark up, but that's not enough to keep a division alive). We once had consoles where the manufacturers made their profit off hardware, it was the 3DO, and it failed miserably because the consoles were $700 or more alone. It would be the same as Sony adding the XBOX LIVE marketplace to the PS4, or Pepsi delivering Coke in their trucks, or EA selling their games through Steam.
And for you PC elitists that say "nu uh, PC is not in the same league as console gaming," that may be true from a consumer stand point, but to a company that sells videogames through a digital marketplace, anyone who also sells games through a digital marketplace is competition. If you wanted a game and you had the option to either pay $2 for it through steam on sale or through PSN for $20, you're going to get it through steam, and Sony won't make any money off the deal since it's a completely different service. Even Sony and Valve worked out some kind of deal where Valve paid a 3% licensing fee to Sony for every game sold through steam through the PS4 steam app, Valve will just raise the price through Steam for PS4 by 3% to cover the costs. NO, lord Gabben is NOT being "super pro-consumer" because it's cheaper on PC, he's just being a smart business man because valve is making the same on every sale regardless of PC or PS4. You might get something like uplay for Wii U where you can get all your uplay achievements for ubisoft games you bought for Wii U, but you can't buy ubisoft games through the uplay app and all games you bought through uplay can't be played on the Wii U.
And if you're wondering "how are PC games streamed to XBOX ONE?" I'm pretty sure that the PC games that you can stream are the ones available through the Windows store, and only the ones through the windows store. They aren't steam, they aren't GOG, they aren't Amazon games, or any of those services. These are games you buy directly from Microsoft, so as far as Microsoft is concerned they're getting your money one way or another, and they don't care so long as they get it. I think this was mentioned at E3. You won't be able to play steam games, you won't be able to play GOG games, you won't be able to play amazon store games, you will just be able to play Microsoft store games.
Now the last argument you may have is the different video streaming services available on consoles even though you can buy movies and TV shows through XBL and PSN, well that's because the primary objective of XBOX and PlayStation is not to sell movies and TV shows, it's to sell games. Sony and Microsoft want you to buy their hardware so you will buy their software (games). Streaming services like netflix, hulu plus, Amazon Instant Video, and the like were originally added as incentives to get you to buy their hardware over the competition, and it's still the same today (I could get the games I want on either PS4 or XB1, and XB1 has more streaming services I am interested in, I think I'll get an XB1). Now you buy an XBOX 1, Microsoft makes a little money on that, and then you buy the games where they make all their money. If you could buy the games through Steam, then Microsoft only makes a few pennies on the sale of the hardware.
And if you pay close attention, only STREAMING is available on console. On PC you can download Amazon and Vudu videos to your hard drive in addition to streaming, but you can ONLY stream Amazon and Vudu on consoles. You can only download movies and TV shows if you buy them through XBL or PSN. But once again, the XBOX and PlayStation are gaming machines that can stream video. If they let the competition eat into their primary food source, then they're just going to be all the more hungry and eventually starve to death.
Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and 3rd party game marketplaces will never come to first party hardware.
Friday, February 13, 2015
The PC is Old News and PC Gamers Need to get with the Times
(Disclaimer, I love retro games and collecting for older consoles. This is not from a consumer/collector stand-point, this is from a marketing and resource allocation standpoint).
We should be focusing on current gen, not last gen.
Hey everyone, happy gamer here and today I had an epiphany. First I noticed that of the 3 main console manufacturers, Nintendo is the most current and with it and Sony and Microsoft are living in the past. Here's why; 2 months after the release of the Wii U, Nintendo stopped making games for the Wii and focused all their attention on the Wii U. Sony and Microsoft on the other hand, are still making games for the PS3/XBOX360 over a year after the release of the PS4/XBOX ONE. Sony and Microsoft are lagging behind Nintendo. They'll never be able to remain competitive if they focus so much effort on last gen consoles. But then I realized, they aren't the worst offenders. The worst offender is the game console known as the PC.
Here's a little background. Videogame consoles come out in generations; pong consoles were the first generation, Atari2600 was the second generation, NES was 3rd generation, so on and so forth. Well, the PC came out around the 2nd generation. It was a good console for the time. Well, when everyone else realized how technology was changing, they released brand new consoles to keep ahead of the competition, the PC made add-ons. Yeah, they took the same old PC and made an "upgrade" accessory. It gave you better gameplay, and they eventually came per-installed, but at the end of the day, it was still just a PC. Just like the 32X and SegaCD.
Now one would think that PC would eventually learn it's lesson and release the PC2 right? I mean Sega eventually wised up and stopped supporting the genesis and it's add-ons in favor of the Saturn. Wrong. Instead of releasing a PC2, PC just kept making add-ons to replace the old ones. And you know what, THEY'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR 30 YEARS!!! GAMING ON THE PC IS STUCK IN THE 1980's BECAUSE THE PC MAKERS THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH RELEASING ADD-ONS INSTEAD OF JUST RELEASING A SECOND CONSOLE! Really, with all the effort you put into making add-ons, just release the PC2 already.
But you know what, I don't really blame the makers of the PC. They said "hey, instead of making an entirely new console, lets make an add-on to extend the life of our current console." It could extend the life long enough while they work on the next PC console. It was just supposed to be a band-aid. However, unlike the Sega gamers and the Genesis add-ons, PC gamers ate it up. They said "hey this is pretty awesome. If I install this on my PC I can keep it for 3 more years, and then I can just put the next add-on on? Most definitely." It's not the PC executives, it's the PC fans. They settle for mediocrity. They will accept the add-on bandage instead of the next-generation release medical treatment. Sure, they can get a PC with all the current add-ons, but they're just going to have to be replaced in a few years.
But here's the truly sad thing, they are stuck in an abusive relationship with the add-ons and their gaming habits. Since new add-ons are constantly coming out, there's no guarantee that a game will work properly with your set of add-ons. Unlike every other console where a game is developed to work specifically with that console, PC games are developed with the intent of working with a certain set of add-ons. PC gamers aren't guaranteed to get the best possible gaming experience out of their PC unless they have specific add-ons. So many games say "for PC," but then there's a list of the type of add-ons that are required. It's very confusing. When you buy a Wii U game, you know it will work on your Wii U. When you buy a PS4 game you know it will work on your PS4. When you buy an XBOX ONE game, you know it will work on your XBOX ONE. When you buy a PC game, you better make sure that you have the proper set of add-ons otherwise it's not going to work.
There's even more to it than just games working with the add-ons, there's also add-ons working with the add-ons. When a PC gamer gets a new add-on, he has to jump through all sorts of hoops to "install" the add-on. He has to make sure that the drivers for the add-on works with the drivers for all the other add-ons. While you can buy a PC with all the current add-ons, soon there will be a new add-on on the market, and you either have to figure out how to make the new add-on work with the old ones, or get an entirely new PC. With every other console, they just release a new console. Plug it in, connect it to the TV, and it's ready to go. No drivers, no compatibility, just simple plug and play.
Now if you're in the gaming world, you've probably heard people say "PC master race." I feel sorry for them. They have fallen into Stockholm Syndrome with the abusive PC console. PC showers them with cheap games and "options," but it's just a sad attempt to milk every last drop out of the 30 year old PC before releasing the PC2. PC gamers, you don't have to stand for this. Leave the 2nd generation and join us in the 8th generation.
Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and I hope you enjoyed my satire.
We should be focusing on current gen, not last gen.
Hey everyone, happy gamer here and today I had an epiphany. First I noticed that of the 3 main console manufacturers, Nintendo is the most current and with it and Sony and Microsoft are living in the past. Here's why; 2 months after the release of the Wii U, Nintendo stopped making games for the Wii and focused all their attention on the Wii U. Sony and Microsoft on the other hand, are still making games for the PS3/XBOX360 over a year after the release of the PS4/XBOX ONE. Sony and Microsoft are lagging behind Nintendo. They'll never be able to remain competitive if they focus so much effort on last gen consoles. But then I realized, they aren't the worst offenders. The worst offender is the game console known as the PC.
Here's a little background. Videogame consoles come out in generations; pong consoles were the first generation, Atari2600 was the second generation, NES was 3rd generation, so on and so forth. Well, the PC came out around the 2nd generation. It was a good console for the time. Well, when everyone else realized how technology was changing, they released brand new consoles to keep ahead of the competition, the PC made add-ons. Yeah, they took the same old PC and made an "upgrade" accessory. It gave you better gameplay, and they eventually came per-installed, but at the end of the day, it was still just a PC. Just like the 32X and SegaCD.
Now one would think that PC would eventually learn it's lesson and release the PC2 right? I mean Sega eventually wised up and stopped supporting the genesis and it's add-ons in favor of the Saturn. Wrong. Instead of releasing a PC2, PC just kept making add-ons to replace the old ones. And you know what, THEY'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR 30 YEARS!!! GAMING ON THE PC IS STUCK IN THE 1980's BECAUSE THE PC MAKERS THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH RELEASING ADD-ONS INSTEAD OF JUST RELEASING A SECOND CONSOLE! Really, with all the effort you put into making add-ons, just release the PC2 already.
But you know what, I don't really blame the makers of the PC. They said "hey, instead of making an entirely new console, lets make an add-on to extend the life of our current console." It could extend the life long enough while they work on the next PC console. It was just supposed to be a band-aid. However, unlike the Sega gamers and the Genesis add-ons, PC gamers ate it up. They said "hey this is pretty awesome. If I install this on my PC I can keep it for 3 more years, and then I can just put the next add-on on? Most definitely." It's not the PC executives, it's the PC fans. They settle for mediocrity. They will accept the add-on bandage instead of the next-generation release medical treatment. Sure, they can get a PC with all the current add-ons, but they're just going to have to be replaced in a few years.
But here's the truly sad thing, they are stuck in an abusive relationship with the add-ons and their gaming habits. Since new add-ons are constantly coming out, there's no guarantee that a game will work properly with your set of add-ons. Unlike every other console where a game is developed to work specifically with that console, PC games are developed with the intent of working with a certain set of add-ons. PC gamers aren't guaranteed to get the best possible gaming experience out of their PC unless they have specific add-ons. So many games say "for PC," but then there's a list of the type of add-ons that are required. It's very confusing. When you buy a Wii U game, you know it will work on your Wii U. When you buy a PS4 game you know it will work on your PS4. When you buy an XBOX ONE game, you know it will work on your XBOX ONE. When you buy a PC game, you better make sure that you have the proper set of add-ons otherwise it's not going to work.
There's even more to it than just games working with the add-ons, there's also add-ons working with the add-ons. When a PC gamer gets a new add-on, he has to jump through all sorts of hoops to "install" the add-on. He has to make sure that the drivers for the add-on works with the drivers for all the other add-ons. While you can buy a PC with all the current add-ons, soon there will be a new add-on on the market, and you either have to figure out how to make the new add-on work with the old ones, or get an entirely new PC. With every other console, they just release a new console. Plug it in, connect it to the TV, and it's ready to go. No drivers, no compatibility, just simple plug and play.
Now if you're in the gaming world, you've probably heard people say "PC master race." I feel sorry for them. They have fallen into Stockholm Syndrome with the abusive PC console. PC showers them with cheap games and "options," but it's just a sad attempt to milk every last drop out of the 30 year old PC before releasing the PC2. PC gamers, you don't have to stand for this. Leave the 2nd generation and join us in the 8th generation.
Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and I hope you enjoyed my satire.
Saturday, September 13, 2014
Shut-up About Specs/Price and Just Play Games
We all know the old talking points; "PC master race with my 60 fps at 1080p," and "yeah but that's because you dropped $2000 on a gaming rig that will last a year, whereas my $400 console will last me 8 years." "But you got little resolution, mine looks superior." "But yours costs so much more." "Well I have Steam sales." "Well I have used games." Back and forth back and forth. SHUT UP!!!!!!
Really, I am sick and tired of people battling over specs and price when it comes to PC and console gaming. As I said it before and I'll say it again, EVERY PLATFORM HAS IT'S POSITIVES AND NEGATIVES! (except steam machine :P, that sucks and everyone knows it). So yeah, I'm sick and tired of the constant battle between PC master racers and console gamers who argue with them. PC gaming is expensive, get over it. I have a $600 laptop that can't do gaming well, and it's cheaper than the consoles on the market. I could mess with the settings, or I could build a budget rig, but I have better things to do with my time then try to make my games work. If I wanted to get the convenience of a console, I would have to buy some super expensive per-built rig. I don't care if you enjoy building PCs, I don't and many console gamers don't either, that's why they're console gamers. PC gaming is also almost exclusively digital, and I don't care if digital is the future and physical media is a thing of the past, I like my wall of games not my hard drive of games, PC or console.
Console also has it's draw backs as well. We don't have steam sales, which are nice if you like digital games. We don't have as large of an indi scene, except for maybe on the Wii U from what I've heard. We aren't running at the best technology has to offer. We don't have the options of mouse and keyboard or controller. We have our drawbacks and you have yours. But when you compare PC gaming to console gaming, you're comparing apples and oranges. PC gaming and console gaming are inherently different. All this bickering over PC vs console is an apple saying "I'm better than the orange because I'm sweet and you're sour," then the orange saying "I'm better than the apple because I'm sour and you're sweet." They're both fruit but they are inherently different and one should base the comparison of the 2 based on the inherent differences.
So what should we base our bickering on smart guy? Duh, who has the better games. One of the best things about Nintendo is that they have great exclusives. Whenever I see a flame war between PC and console gamers over specs and price, there's always 1 or 2 Nintendo gamers that are like "I have Mario, I have Smash Bros, I have fun games." That's what I like about Nintendo consoles. You don't see anyone going "he he, Wii U underpowered, I'm so much better than you." Well you did at the beginning when Nintendo was dropping the ball on the 3rd party releases, but now with all the exclusives, people can still be "well Wii U is underpowered my PS4/XBOX ONE/PC is so superior," but all the Nintendo gamer has to do is hold up a copy of Smash Bros and say "no, this is why I'm better than you." There are exclusives out there on PS4, XBOX ONE, and PC (well I think there are some on PS4 and XBOX ONE, not sure yet really). But yeah, how about instead of fighting over specs, we fight over who has the best games. I mean, Yoshi Story 2 and Kirby's Canvas Curse 2 are the reason I bought my Wii U, and I'll probably buy Donkey Kong Tropic Freeze, Mario 3D World, and a bunch of the other exclusives on Wii U, because that's why I bought my Wii U, the games. I don't play graphics, I play games. I'll take Conker's Bad Fur Day played on a fuzzy CRT over some uber realistic war shooter at 4K 60FPS at max settings any day. Well this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and fight over games, not graphics.
Oh and before I go, I'm not a PC gamer, but my brother is. He plays his steam games on his laptop that's about as good as mine when it comes to gaming. He's fidgeted with it to make the games work on his laptop. Like any brother, I like to have a little light hearten fun at his expense, and he the same for me. Nothing serious, just like the story I'm about to share. One day I'm looking over his shoulder as he's playing some real time strategy brawler and the settings are rather crap. I throw the PC master race talking points at him since they aren't being fulfilled. I'm like "Oh so this is what glorious PC gaming looks like, is this 1080p 60fps? My our PS3 looks better than that. Why are you wasting your time if you can't get an experience that's better than a last gen console?" I'm just being a smart ass and trying to get some kind of response. He's just like "Dude shut up, I PC game because I don't have a TV at school, all my friends are on steam, and there's a bunch of games on here I can't get on console (like the one I'm playing at the moment)." Now why can't we all have reasons like that?
Really, I am sick and tired of people battling over specs and price when it comes to PC and console gaming. As I said it before and I'll say it again, EVERY PLATFORM HAS IT'S POSITIVES AND NEGATIVES! (except steam machine :P, that sucks and everyone knows it). So yeah, I'm sick and tired of the constant battle between PC master racers and console gamers who argue with them. PC gaming is expensive, get over it. I have a $600 laptop that can't do gaming well, and it's cheaper than the consoles on the market. I could mess with the settings, or I could build a budget rig, but I have better things to do with my time then try to make my games work. If I wanted to get the convenience of a console, I would have to buy some super expensive per-built rig. I don't care if you enjoy building PCs, I don't and many console gamers don't either, that's why they're console gamers. PC gaming is also almost exclusively digital, and I don't care if digital is the future and physical media is a thing of the past, I like my wall of games not my hard drive of games, PC or console.
Console also has it's draw backs as well. We don't have steam sales, which are nice if you like digital games. We don't have as large of an indi scene, except for maybe on the Wii U from what I've heard. We aren't running at the best technology has to offer. We don't have the options of mouse and keyboard or controller. We have our drawbacks and you have yours. But when you compare PC gaming to console gaming, you're comparing apples and oranges. PC gaming and console gaming are inherently different. All this bickering over PC vs console is an apple saying "I'm better than the orange because I'm sweet and you're sour," then the orange saying "I'm better than the apple because I'm sour and you're sweet." They're both fruit but they are inherently different and one should base the comparison of the 2 based on the inherent differences.
So what should we base our bickering on smart guy? Duh, who has the better games. One of the best things about Nintendo is that they have great exclusives. Whenever I see a flame war between PC and console gamers over specs and price, there's always 1 or 2 Nintendo gamers that are like "I have Mario, I have Smash Bros, I have fun games." That's what I like about Nintendo consoles. You don't see anyone going "he he, Wii U underpowered, I'm so much better than you." Well you did at the beginning when Nintendo was dropping the ball on the 3rd party releases, but now with all the exclusives, people can still be "well Wii U is underpowered my PS4/XBOX ONE/PC is so superior," but all the Nintendo gamer has to do is hold up a copy of Smash Bros and say "no, this is why I'm better than you." There are exclusives out there on PS4, XBOX ONE, and PC (well I think there are some on PS4 and XBOX ONE, not sure yet really). But yeah, how about instead of fighting over specs, we fight over who has the best games. I mean, Yoshi Story 2 and Kirby's Canvas Curse 2 are the reason I bought my Wii U, and I'll probably buy Donkey Kong Tropic Freeze, Mario 3D World, and a bunch of the other exclusives on Wii U, because that's why I bought my Wii U, the games. I don't play graphics, I play games. I'll take Conker's Bad Fur Day played on a fuzzy CRT over some uber realistic war shooter at 4K 60FPS at max settings any day. Well this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and fight over games, not graphics.
Oh and before I go, I'm not a PC gamer, but my brother is. He plays his steam games on his laptop that's about as good as mine when it comes to gaming. He's fidgeted with it to make the games work on his laptop. Like any brother, I like to have a little light hearten fun at his expense, and he the same for me. Nothing serious, just like the story I'm about to share. One day I'm looking over his shoulder as he's playing some real time strategy brawler and the settings are rather crap. I throw the PC master race talking points at him since they aren't being fulfilled. I'm like "Oh so this is what glorious PC gaming looks like, is this 1080p 60fps? My our PS3 looks better than that. Why are you wasting your time if you can't get an experience that's better than a last gen console?" I'm just being a smart ass and trying to get some kind of response. He's just like "Dude shut up, I PC game because I don't have a TV at school, all my friends are on steam, and there's a bunch of games on here I can't get on console (like the one I'm playing at the moment)." Now why can't we all have reasons like that?
Friday, February 21, 2014
The Steam Box is Destined to fail By Definition.
Hey everyone, I know it's kind of died down since CES, but lets talk about the Steam box, Steam machine, a home video game console that runs Steam, and why I think it's destined to fail. Now before you jump to conclusions about "oh you're just a PC gaming hater," or "you can't see beyond the big 3," or whatever. First off, I'm not a PC hater. I don't like PC elitist fanboys who ridicule console gaming and say that PC gaming is the only way to truly enjoy video games. I respect PC gaming for what it is; a way to play video games where one can make the game look and play as good as technologically possible during that month. From a hardware standpoint, it's also the most expensive if you want to have it look and play as good as technologically possible during that month. Anything beyond that, you need to either upgrade or compromise. Personally, I just prefer console gaming; no compatibility issues, no worries about being able to run the game with your current "rig," only need to upgrade once every 10 years, etc. As for me not looking beyond the big 3, I have an OUYA. I love my OUYA. It is exactly what I expect it to be; a cheap mini-console full of indi-games that can side load android apps. It doesn't have the big titles like CoD or Mass Effect or Skyrim or any of those. I accept it for what it is. I accept all video game consoles, including you PC, for what they are, and that's where I have trouble seeing how a steam console would be successful.
OK, so lets give a little back story. As you probably know, there are PC gamers and console gamers. Many people play both PC and consoles, because they each have their trade offs.
On PC, you can have the most up to date hardware so you can play your games at 300 frames per second at 10k resolution. However, to do that, you need to pay through the nose to get the hardware capable of doing that. Steam from Valve has many sales to offset the cost, so a game that was $60 is now $10 and stuff like that, but there's a trade off to that too because now the game is essentially locked to your account for good. There are some ways around that like gifting, but at the time of writing this, you can't buy a used Steam game from gamestop. DRM, but people accept it due to the sales and the fact that an upgraded PC can still play the old games.
Now on consoles, things are essentially the opposite. On consoles, the hardware is the same hardware for however long the console generation is. However, that means that you don't need to upgrade the hardware to play the latest games, no comparability issues. The developers don't always drop their prices, but then there are used games, aka no DRM. Microsoft tried to do DRM with the XBOX ONE, and people hated it and it was looking so bad for them that they reversed their decision. Consoles aren't always reverse compatible, but the owner always has the option to just leave their last console connected or just sell it.
So the question is, do you want ultra high graphics and cheap games at the cost of expensive and quickly obsolete hardware and DRM, or do you want no DRM and 1 time investment hardware at the cost of relatively consistant graphics for 10 or so years.
Now some people might be wondering "where's the mention of keyboard and mouse vs controller?" No, not going there. That's just personal preference. Personally I find keyboard and mouse very awkward, others find it very precise and optimal. If I did non-point and click PC gaming, I would probably still use a controller.
OK so what does this have to do with the Steam machine? Well I can only see negatives of both without the necessary counter positives. PC gamers don't necessarily like console gaming due to the drawbacks, and console gamers don't necessarily like PC gaming due to the drawbacks. I'm going to go through all the possible combinations of ways to make a Steam machine I can think of, and why I think it will fail.
Model 1: "hardware just like consoles; you can't upgrade the hardware, it just plugs into your TV, and it plays your Steam library. Priced similar to a console."
OK, so this sounds very similar to a normal console. You can't upgrade the hardware, it's priced around the same as the others, and you're stuck with it until the next generation. Well that kind of fully defeats the purpose of PC gaming right there. PC gamers want to upgrade their hardware. They might like it for a month, but after that, they'll just go back to their PC with the most up to date hardware. But it play's your entire Steam library on your TV. Yeah until the hardware becomes obsolete and now you run into compatibility issues. You think the devs are going to make a "PC Steam" flavor and a "Console Steam" flavor, I highly doubt it. That could go one of 2 ways. When you buy the game you instantly get access to both flavors so 2 copies of the game for the price of 1, well that's a lot of extra work. Sure with the sales you get it for dirt cheap, but they've already been out for a while, they don't have to remake the game. Then there's the "you buy it again," and that's not going to go over well with the consumers.
Now at CES, there were talks about different companies making different models of a Steam Machine the same way different companies make different models of PCs, so hardware upgrading is possible with this, but that means buying a completely new $400 console every time you want to upgrade instead of the $50 ram card or $100 graphics card. Yeah, no. I've heard of people spending thousands of dollars upgrading their PCs for gaming, but this would mean spending tens of thousands of dollars upgrading. I just don't see it happening.
Model 2: "like model 1, but you can upgrade the hardware with proprietary parts."
OK, little less like a console, little more like a PC. You can now upgrade the hardware to get better performance but it's all proprietary like console add-ons. So what's the problem here? Well this means that you don't have the freedom of part selection like with PCs. If your PC has parts from brand X, but brand Y has better parts, you can change them and get better performance or whatever made them better. It's also got the free market in it's favor so if the performance between 2 brands is the same but one is cheaper, you can get the cheaper. However, if it's proprietary, you're screwed in terms of quality diversity and price diversity. With the PSP, I could use any brand of Memory Stick Pro Duo I wanted, and I have 3 different memory sticks each a different brand. However with the PS Vita, Sony went completely proprietary, so now instead of a $20 32-gig micro-SD card, it's $100 for a 16-gig proprietary memory card, and if those memory cards suck, well you're screwed. If the Steam machine used proprietary upgradable parts, I would expect similar price gouging like with the PSP/Vita example.
Model 3: "like models 1 and 2, but uses standard computer parts."
Soooo, a dedicated PC with HDMI out. With this one, it's almost exactly the same as the gamer's normal PC. They would essentially have 2 PCs, with the only difference being that one can't do all the other things that their PC can do, like word processing. If it could do the other things like word processing, then it's exactly the same as their PC, and unless they want to have 1 PC upstairs and 1 PC downstairs or something like that, then there's absolutely no reason to buy the Steam machine since it does everything that their PC does.
"But what about the console gamer? The steam machine would act like a gateway to the glorious PC master race." Ummm, no. Remember when I talked about the drawbacks of PC gaming, like DRM and high price for hardware. Console gamers don't want that. When the PS3 launched, the console gamers didn't want it because of the high price. Part of the reason the Vita is hurting is because of the proprietary memory cards. The main reason it's hurting is because Sony isn't marketing it well, but the proprietary memory cards are an issue. They also don't like the DRM. Remember the XBOX ONE reveal and the DRM on all games; I've heard it compared to Steam, Model 1 of the Steam machine was essentially the XBOX ONE's original concept minus the kinect. Console gamers don't accept DRM, they don't want to worry about hardware upgrades, especially proprietary ones. SegaCD and 32X anyone? Proprietary hardware upgrades that weren't all that great. They might buy a model 3, but at that point they're already crossing over to PC gaming and that will just be their first gaming PC. In order for a Steam machine to appeal to console gamers, it would need to not have DRM and have hardware that will last for an entire generation, and with that you revolutionize Steam to the point that console gaming in general becomes completely irrelevant because now you took away the drawbacks of PC gaming, essentially meaning that the Steam machine killed itself.
I just honestly don't see who a Steam machine would appeal to. You aren't going to get the console gamer because it doesn't have the benefits of console gaming. You aren't going to get the PC gamer because it doesn't have the benefits of PC gaming without getting ridiculous. It's not even in the same league as the OUYA. I doubt upon initial boot up the Steam machine will say "thank-you for buying us, we made it easy for you to open up and tinker with, doing so will not void the warranty," nor will it cost $100 and give you the ability to sideload android apps. I just can't imagine who would buy a Steam machine outside of collectors like me.
Yes, at some point I would probably buy a Steam machine, because I am a collector and I like consoles. I didn't buy my OUYA because I wanted an open source console or a digital distribution indi-game console, I wanted this will-be obscure piece of video game history while it's still cheap. Well this has been happy gamer, and remember, if you try to please everyone, you please no one.
OK, so lets give a little back story. As you probably know, there are PC gamers and console gamers. Many people play both PC and consoles, because they each have their trade offs.
On PC, you can have the most up to date hardware so you can play your games at 300 frames per second at 10k resolution. However, to do that, you need to pay through the nose to get the hardware capable of doing that. Steam from Valve has many sales to offset the cost, so a game that was $60 is now $10 and stuff like that, but there's a trade off to that too because now the game is essentially locked to your account for good. There are some ways around that like gifting, but at the time of writing this, you can't buy a used Steam game from gamestop. DRM, but people accept it due to the sales and the fact that an upgraded PC can still play the old games.
Now on consoles, things are essentially the opposite. On consoles, the hardware is the same hardware for however long the console generation is. However, that means that you don't need to upgrade the hardware to play the latest games, no comparability issues. The developers don't always drop their prices, but then there are used games, aka no DRM. Microsoft tried to do DRM with the XBOX ONE, and people hated it and it was looking so bad for them that they reversed their decision. Consoles aren't always reverse compatible, but the owner always has the option to just leave their last console connected or just sell it.
So the question is, do you want ultra high graphics and cheap games at the cost of expensive and quickly obsolete hardware and DRM, or do you want no DRM and 1 time investment hardware at the cost of relatively consistant graphics for 10 or so years.
Now some people might be wondering "where's the mention of keyboard and mouse vs controller?" No, not going there. That's just personal preference. Personally I find keyboard and mouse very awkward, others find it very precise and optimal. If I did non-point and click PC gaming, I would probably still use a controller.
OK so what does this have to do with the Steam machine? Well I can only see negatives of both without the necessary counter positives. PC gamers don't necessarily like console gaming due to the drawbacks, and console gamers don't necessarily like PC gaming due to the drawbacks. I'm going to go through all the possible combinations of ways to make a Steam machine I can think of, and why I think it will fail.
Model 1: "hardware just like consoles; you can't upgrade the hardware, it just plugs into your TV, and it plays your Steam library. Priced similar to a console."
OK, so this sounds very similar to a normal console. You can't upgrade the hardware, it's priced around the same as the others, and you're stuck with it until the next generation. Well that kind of fully defeats the purpose of PC gaming right there. PC gamers want to upgrade their hardware. They might like it for a month, but after that, they'll just go back to their PC with the most up to date hardware. But it play's your entire Steam library on your TV. Yeah until the hardware becomes obsolete and now you run into compatibility issues. You think the devs are going to make a "PC Steam" flavor and a "Console Steam" flavor, I highly doubt it. That could go one of 2 ways. When you buy the game you instantly get access to both flavors so 2 copies of the game for the price of 1, well that's a lot of extra work. Sure with the sales you get it for dirt cheap, but they've already been out for a while, they don't have to remake the game. Then there's the "you buy it again," and that's not going to go over well with the consumers.
Now at CES, there were talks about different companies making different models of a Steam Machine the same way different companies make different models of PCs, so hardware upgrading is possible with this, but that means buying a completely new $400 console every time you want to upgrade instead of the $50 ram card or $100 graphics card. Yeah, no. I've heard of people spending thousands of dollars upgrading their PCs for gaming, but this would mean spending tens of thousands of dollars upgrading. I just don't see it happening.
Model 2: "like model 1, but you can upgrade the hardware with proprietary parts."
OK, little less like a console, little more like a PC. You can now upgrade the hardware to get better performance but it's all proprietary like console add-ons. So what's the problem here? Well this means that you don't have the freedom of part selection like with PCs. If your PC has parts from brand X, but brand Y has better parts, you can change them and get better performance or whatever made them better. It's also got the free market in it's favor so if the performance between 2 brands is the same but one is cheaper, you can get the cheaper. However, if it's proprietary, you're screwed in terms of quality diversity and price diversity. With the PSP, I could use any brand of Memory Stick Pro Duo I wanted, and I have 3 different memory sticks each a different brand. However with the PS Vita, Sony went completely proprietary, so now instead of a $20 32-gig micro-SD card, it's $100 for a 16-gig proprietary memory card, and if those memory cards suck, well you're screwed. If the Steam machine used proprietary upgradable parts, I would expect similar price gouging like with the PSP/Vita example.
Model 3: "like models 1 and 2, but uses standard computer parts."
Soooo, a dedicated PC with HDMI out. With this one, it's almost exactly the same as the gamer's normal PC. They would essentially have 2 PCs, with the only difference being that one can't do all the other things that their PC can do, like word processing. If it could do the other things like word processing, then it's exactly the same as their PC, and unless they want to have 1 PC upstairs and 1 PC downstairs or something like that, then there's absolutely no reason to buy the Steam machine since it does everything that their PC does.
"But what about the console gamer? The steam machine would act like a gateway to the glorious PC master race." Ummm, no. Remember when I talked about the drawbacks of PC gaming, like DRM and high price for hardware. Console gamers don't want that. When the PS3 launched, the console gamers didn't want it because of the high price. Part of the reason the Vita is hurting is because of the proprietary memory cards. The main reason it's hurting is because Sony isn't marketing it well, but the proprietary memory cards are an issue. They also don't like the DRM. Remember the XBOX ONE reveal and the DRM on all games; I've heard it compared to Steam, Model 1 of the Steam machine was essentially the XBOX ONE's original concept minus the kinect. Console gamers don't accept DRM, they don't want to worry about hardware upgrades, especially proprietary ones. SegaCD and 32X anyone? Proprietary hardware upgrades that weren't all that great. They might buy a model 3, but at that point they're already crossing over to PC gaming and that will just be their first gaming PC. In order for a Steam machine to appeal to console gamers, it would need to not have DRM and have hardware that will last for an entire generation, and with that you revolutionize Steam to the point that console gaming in general becomes completely irrelevant because now you took away the drawbacks of PC gaming, essentially meaning that the Steam machine killed itself.
I just honestly don't see who a Steam machine would appeal to. You aren't going to get the console gamer because it doesn't have the benefits of console gaming. You aren't going to get the PC gamer because it doesn't have the benefits of PC gaming without getting ridiculous. It's not even in the same league as the OUYA. I doubt upon initial boot up the Steam machine will say "thank-you for buying us, we made it easy for you to open up and tinker with, doing so will not void the warranty," nor will it cost $100 and give you the ability to sideload android apps. I just can't imagine who would buy a Steam machine outside of collectors like me.
Yes, at some point I would probably buy a Steam machine, because I am a collector and I like consoles. I didn't buy my OUYA because I wanted an open source console or a digital distribution indi-game console, I wanted this will-be obscure piece of video game history while it's still cheap. Well this has been happy gamer, and remember, if you try to please everyone, you please no one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)