consoles hold back technology

whos with me?

Technology is pretty low on my list of importances. Great software is at the top.

graphics are not the most important thing, but for me they make the game more believeable and immersive.

graphics are not the most important thing, but for me it make the game more believeable and immersive.

Appule70

Consoles were made for casuals. Do you really think casuals would keep up with the newest tech all the time?

Teh Mega Supah cell doesn't! :P

[QUOTE="Appule70"]

graphics are not the most important thing, but for me it make the game more believeable and immersive.

OreoMilkshake

i do.. but thanks to consoles (and maybe pirates too), even the newest pc games look very dated. only crysis and warhead look new, but thats only two games.

They do hold back processing power. However,gameplay isfar more important than graphics.They are also a cheaper alternative to gaming PCs, and Nintendo innovated the gaming industry this gen with motion controls.

Im mostly a console gamer and i agree.

consoles move technology because most pc developers wouldn't make super advanced games because few people need a gpu, and cpu that advanced to play 1 game. Instead when a console comes out, pc developers decided to make more and more next gen titles because of the graphics. Let's put it in this perspective, half life 2 the best looking game was out in 2004. There wasn't a huge change and very little graphically change in graphics between then and 2006 when the xbox 360 came out. Far cry, doom 3, BF2, Fear, Swat 4 and half life 2 are the only 6 games that I remember between that period of time that was for high-end pcs. And all of them usually had the same specs that were used for half life 2.

If only your average joe had 1 grand to blow on grafix cards eh? and people were moaning when the ps3 launched at a ridiculous price.

no.. they dont..

[QUOTE="OreoMilkshake"][QUOTE="Appule70"]

graphics are not the most important thing, but for me it make the game more believeable and immersive.

Appule70

i do.. but thanks to consoles (and maybe pirates too), even the newest pc games look very dated. only crysis and warhead look new, but thats only two games.

What is your logic in saying that consoles somehow degrade the graphics quality of PC games? Because they're porting games form console to PC? But what about all of the many PC exclusive games?

I'll tell you why there are only a couple of of games that look as good as Crysis. They are very expensive to develop.

Ummm......no. Cost holds back technology, not consoles. wstfld

Console dont hld back anything, technology advances forward just fine without them. When the tech is sufficiently advanced to be a discernable jump up, and available at a cost you can sell a console at, then the consoles get updated.

Simples!

Ummm......no. Cost holds back technology, not consoles. wstfld

[QUOTE="OreoMilkshake"][QUOTE="Appule70"]

graphics are not the most important thing, but for me it make the game more believeable and immersive.

Appule70

i do.. but thanks to consoles (and maybe pirates too), even the newest pc games look very dated. only crysis and warhead look new, but thats only two games.

[QUOTE="Appule70"]

[QUOTE="OreoMilkshake"]Then play your PC and let us console gamers do whatever.swamprat_basic

i do.. but thanks to consoles (and maybe pirates too), even the newest pc games look very dated. only crysis and warhead look new, but thats only two games.

What is your logic in saying that consoles somehow degrade the graphics quality of PC games? Because they're porting games form console to PC? But what about all of the many PC exclusive games?

I'll tell you why there are only a couple of of games that look as good as Crysis. They are very expensive to develop.

Agreed. And the way the economy is right now no doubt has some affect on game graphics. I wouldn't be at all surprised if thats the reason my nearly 3 year old 8800 is STILL ripping games apart left and right, when historically, a card that old would only be good for using as a doorstop:P

Then play your PC and let us console gamers do whatever.OreoMilkshake

i do.. but thanks to consoles (and maybe pirates too), even the newest pc games look very dated. only crysis and warhead look new, but thats only two games.

Concsoles have the newest technology at launch.

whos with me?

Appule70

I don't think so. They actually push technology as far as developers creating tools to get more done out of less hardware, with theirunique graphics engines that are optimized to take advantage of the console. I use my pc for internet browsing, downloading music and movies, and occasional media extender to my 360, so I'm glad to see consoles released every 6-7 years , because I'm not into pc gaming. I guess to each its own, but I don't think consoles are holding back technology.

whos with me?

Appule70

It's not console that hold back technology, it's actually the high costs of the video game creation, but also the lack of PC exclusives. People say that PC gaming is dying and while it is actually my prefered platform to play on they are right in a sense. How many high priced PC exclusives do we see these days? Or even PC games that are multi plats but made for PC first and then ported to a console?

When the majority of popular games are created first for consoles and then ported over there is no need for PC hardware to continue to get better. And the reason I say it's the high cost of games, it's because dev's can't afford to make games for PC, partially because the average person doesn't have the hardware to play a high end game to make use of a 295 GTX but also piracy.

Hope that made some sense, when I actually think about how bad it has become in regards to getting a nice PC exclusive it makes me sad.

[QUOTE="Appule70"]

whos with me?

whitey_rolls

It's not console that hold back technology, it's actually the high costs of the video game creation, but also the lack of PC exclusives. People say that PC gaming is dying and while it is actually my prefered platform to play on they are right in a sense. How many high priced PC exclusives do we see these days? Or even PC games that are multi plats but made for PC first and then ported to a console?

When the majority of popular games are created first for consoles and then ported over there is no need for PC hardware to continue to get better. And the reason I say it's the high cost of games, it's because dev's can't afford to make games for PC, partially because the average person doesn't have the hardware to play a high end game to make use of a 295 GTX but also piracy.

Hope that made some sense, when I actually think about how bad it has become in regards to getting a nice PC exclusive it makes me sad.

There is NOTHING stopping companies from advancing computer tech, esp for PC.

But as for the software that is needed to go with that hardware....developing HD video games are already expensive and risky enough.

Technology is pretty low on my list of importances. Great software is at the top.

goblaa

Consoles do in fact hold back the progression of gaming technology, a fixed hardware platform can only go so far.

However whether this is a bad thing is debatable, higher quality content leads to higher costs, looking at gaming today we are more cost limited than hardware limited.

For example PS3 fanboys accuse 360 of holding them back because of their DVD disk capacity, but the fact of the matter is the content cost to take advantage of something like Blu-rays capacity would be astronomical. A Blu-ray utilizing game would be too expensive to stay exclusive to any one platform; and PS3 is the only platform with a suitable Blu-ray install base. As it stands Blu-ray is mostly just being used for lower compression content, getting advantages without skyrocketing costs.

Though frankly console limitation of technology is still a negative thing in my eyes, it's console orientated limitation; which means it restricts game design that isn't more expensive but simply not possible on consoles. The most common example of this is consoles memory limitation on level design, they favour streaming which impacts the experience.

I think there couldn't have been a worse moment to say consoles hold back technology.

You have HDTV, Bluray, motion(plus), the wii vitality sensor which is going to be pretty crazy, natal and the magic sony balls coming out.
There's the downloadable indie content and the big budget games. All the options are there for consumers and developers.
You have hospitals and senior houses implementing wii's.
I mean basically gaming hardware has never ever advanced so much in such little time.

I think the only issue is the developers completely drowning in the possibilities and the publishers who only want moneymoneymoney and make all the wrong decisions.

Well, considering that the PS3 is the first console that uses Cell and Blu-ray technologies which are both uncommon then I'd say consoles are pushing the technology not holding it back. abuabed

A hard to program for experimental CPU no one else wants to adopt in gaming; and a prematurely adopted disk format that is too slow to take full advantage of its storage capacity. I suppose that's what happens when you try to become future proof, you adopt technologies before they are ready and all the bugs are ironed out.

Everyone else will adopt Blu-ray in games when it is 'actually needed', the only reason it exists in the first place is because of Sony's forced install base. As for Cell it seems the industry has chosen a different path with GPGPU.

Yea consoles are holding back pc development all the developers have focused on console development. and on consoles you gotta worry about making the game fit on the console rather than just making a good game. also consoles have limited options for controls. see like call of duty 4 on pc has leaning and the console versions dont lol. consoles ruined f.e.a.r 2, the first one had leaning and lead platform was pc, on fear 2 lead platform was consoles and it has no leaning now. because not enough buttons for leaning lol. consoles are holding back developers just making good games.tgertfdftgyhtgf

Blaming consoles for PC games not having certain features or enough graphical upgrades has got to stop. If you want to blame something then blame the developers and publishers. They are the ones soley responsible for PC games not being any good, not consoles. Consoles are not preventing the developer from adding the ability to lean into the PC version of a game. If a game is developed first on a console and the developer simply ports it to the PC without modifying the game to take advantage of PC hardware then the developer is either being lazy or the developer/publisher is being too tight with their budget and trying to make a quick buck.

Well, considering that the PS3 is the first console that uses Cell and Blu-ray technologies which are both uncommon then I'd say consoles are pushing the technology not holding it back. abuabed

Technology holds bad consoles

[QUOTE="Appule70"]

graphics are not the most important thing, but for me it make the game more believeable and immersive.

OreoMilkshake

or we will play real console, what have good graphics

Concsoles have the newest technology at launch.

EvanTheGamer

no actually they don't, since they are in development for years they usually are based on technology 1-2 years old

whos with me?

Appule70

Not one bit. Research and development costs hold back technology.

Well, considering that the PS3 is the first console that uses Cell and Blu-ray technologies which are both uncommon then I'd say consoles are pushing the technology not holding it back. abuabed

Joke post?

I mean, you don't really believe that, right?

No! It is technology such as that wasted on science and medcine which holds back console based videogames.

I don't think they do.