[QUOTE="aaronmullan"][QUOTE="MortalDecay"] Talk about missing the point....MortalDecayNah, I got your silly point. Who cares if MS get profit for their OS? They still don't control the gaming market for PC, PERIOD. Then fanboys need to stop with all of this crap about how MS has nothing to do with PC gaming, when they have a lot to do with it. Silly, or not, it's a fact. Why on earth would you care for what fanboys say? If people are telling you MS has NOTHING to do with PC gaming, then it's an obvious hint not to take them seriously.
Should we refer Xbox 360/ PC releases as Microsoft exclusives since Microsoft is
This topic is locked from further discussion.
The reason why PC gaming isent owned by Microsoft is because Microsoft has no control over PC gaming.
There's no doubt that 99.9% of all PC games run on Windows (as opposed to Linux, Unix or what have you), however...
Microsoft cannot decide if you should be allowed to create a game for the PC
Microsoft cannot demand payment of license fees for developing a game for then PC
Microsoft does not have the ability to ban you from using your games online if they dont like you
Microsoft do not decide what hardware you are allowed to buy or use with your PC
So yes, PC gaming does generate a profit for Microsoft through the sale of Windows. However unlike the three consoles, Microsoft have no control over, and certainly no ownership of, PC gaming.
game companies make games for windows and just that alone means game companies have relationships with... Microsoft! not hp, dell, or other PC vendors, basicly the tools they have probably work for writing games for windows and 360 just using a few different libraries, and so long as they use directx primarilly you won't see games on different systems, so Microsoft will likely seek out exclusivels for BOTH of their platforms. They might not have as much control but saying they don't have anything to do with whats happenning with pc gaming other then windows is stupid.The reason why PC gaming isent owned by Microsoft is because Microsoft has no control over PC gaming.
There's no doubt that 99.9% of all PC games run on Windows (as opposed to Linux, Unix or what have you), however...
Microsoft cannot decide if you should be allowed to create a game for the PC
Microsoft cannot demand payment of license fees for developing a game for then PC
Microsoft does not have the ability to ban you from using your games online if they dont like you
Microsoft do not decide what hardware you are allowed to buy or use with your PC
So yes, PC gaming does generate a profit for Microsoft through the sale of Windows. However unlike the three consoles, Microsoft have no control over, and certainly no ownership of, PC gaming.
Mazoch
i was just pointing out that M$ does see money off of game developement on windows, not for each game sold but at least in the tools to dev fo on windows, then some guy said they'd could do it for free using express... Yeah, but Express is actually pretty important to the business model. The real limitation of the Express IDEs isn't what you can use it for - they're pretty permissive about that, and you can indeed release commercial apps written with it - but that you can't plug anything into it, for example source control. MS knows they don't have to put limits on what you can or can't release with VSE, because Visual Studio is one of the few apps MS writes that is so damn good it pays for itself in time saved.[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="lowe0"]Why would a large dev be using VS Express? I can get Visual Studio Pro with MSDN for 800 a seat, and it's good for 3 years worth of upgrades through SA. That's about 1-2% of a good coder's salary.lowe0
That said, you don't even need VSE to program on Windows. There are plenty of other C++ IDEs, if you don't plan on using XNA, or if you really hate yourself, you could always fire up a text editor and gcc :cry:.
There are features for larger companies that the paid for version helps with so i doubt valve is runnign express when they have so much data to go through, a small company might be able to get away with it, but either way, you might be able to get other C++ compilers, but if i'm not mistaken, to make a windows program you need the windows compiler and libraries which only come with one of the visual studiosgame companies make games for windows and just that alone means game companies have relationships with... Microsoft! not hp, dell, or other PC vendors, basicly the tools they have probably work for writing games for windows and 360 just using a few different libraries, and so long as they use directx primarilly you won't see games on different systems, so Microsoft will likely seek out exclusivels for BOTH of their platforms. They might not have as much control but saying they don't have anything to do with whats happenning with pc gaming other then windows is stupid.[QUOTE="Mazoch"]
The reason why PC gaming isent owned by Microsoft is because Microsoft has no control over PC gaming.
There's no doubt that 99.9% of all PC games run on Windows (as opposed to Linux, Unix or what have you), however...
Microsoft cannot decide if you should be allowed to create a game for the PC
Microsoft cannot demand payment of license fees for developing a game for then PC
Microsoft does not have the ability to ban you from using your games online if they dont like you
Microsoft do not decide what hardware you are allowed to buy or use with your PC
So yes, PC gaming does generate a profit for Microsoft through the sale of Windows. However unlike the three consoles, Microsoft have no control over, and certainly no ownership of, PC gaming.
savagetwinkie
No actually they have pretty much nothing to do with the games developed for the PC.Yes, they developed the framework that the game developers build upon. And yes long term they certainly wield an influence since they have a say in how the framework will be developed in the future. However the diffrence is again that when you buy a X360 (or a PS3, or a Wii), the parent comany controls more or less all aspects of what you can and cannot do with that machine.
With a PC, you buy windows. Once that is done MS has no further control on how you use it, what you install or what companies you buy games from. They do not offer exclusive titles.. there's not reason for them to do so. They don't make any profit from the sale of PC games.
On a console (regardless of company and type), in order to create a game you need permission from MS, sony or nintendo. Then you need to pay them for the right to develop a game for the platform. You then need to pay them for the Dev kits needed to develop the games. Once you finished the game you need to pay them a further license fee to release the game on their platform. Last but not least you'll be paying them a small bonus for each copy of your game sold. Why do you think the companies are willing to sell their consoles at a loss?
On the PC? You buy a copy of windows, hell, if you really wanted to could develop the game on linux (though it would make it awfully hard to test :P)
[QUOTE="lowe0"]Yeah, but Express is actually pretty important to the business model. The real limitation of the Express IDEs isn't what you can use it for - they're pretty permissive about that, and you can indeed release commercial apps written with it - but that you can't plug anything into it, for example source control. MS knows they don't have to put limits on what you can or can't release with VSE, because Visual Studio is one of the few apps MS writes that is so damn good it pays for itself in time saved.[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] i was just pointing out that M$ does see money off of game developement on windows, not for each game sold but at least in the tools to dev fo on windows, then some guy said they'd could do it for free using express...savagetwinkie
That said, you don't even need VSE to program on Windows. There are plenty of other C++ IDEs, if you don't plan on using XNA, or if you really hate yourself, you could always fire up a text editor and gcc :cry:.
There are features for larger companies that the paid for version helps with so i doubt valve is runnign express when they have so much data to go through, a small company might be able to get away with it, but either way, you might be able to get other C++ compilers, but if i'm not mistaken, to make a windows program you need the windows compiler and libraries which only come with one of the visual studios No, you can download free versions of both the C++, C and Java compilers. They are not the property of MS. MS just happen to develop one quite popular editor for C/C++ (Visual Studio). In other words, you don't need anything from MS aside from a copy of Windows. From a purely theoretical stand point you don't even need a copy of windows, though it would hardly be practical to try to make a game / program without being able to test it :)
Its not company wars..punkrocker163So why is MLB the show called a PS3 exclusive then? Wasn't the argument based on it being a Sony game, therefor making it ok to call it an exclusive even though it's also on the PS2?
No, there is no company that solely represents PC gaming
Comeon people!! This is so obvious that its painful people dont see it, ...or are pretending to not see it,
.
when it comes to PC's your Operating System is pretty much the platform, I mean ...how many hermits out there are gaming on Linux or Macs??? I mean seriously, what have you been gaming on for all these years?? Mh? ISNT IT Microsoft's Windows???
.
Hermits and Lemmings are pretty much brothers, its so obvious, we even share most games? If you cant see how extremely crucial Microsoft has been for PC gaming for so many years then I don't see how I can convince you otherwise, but for me atleast, PC and Xbox 360 are both Microsft platforms,
.
I'm a hermit, and unless I start gaming on Linux, unless I start gaming on Macs, then my PC is a Microsft paltform, period! thanks Bill, our main man!!
You might call it "Microsoft operating systems exclusive", it's not exclusive, but I guess it can be ""Microsoft operating systems exclusive".
the problem is that through legal 3rd party tools plenty of games can be played on Linux and OSX. Also..what about games that are PC/PS3 only. Will we call them "PC/ps3 exclusive"?
Altough it does tell a lot about how pathetic 360 library of exclusives is when lemmings have to grasps straws like this. Other platforms somehow can secure good ammount of exclusives for themselves, it's just 360 that's failing at that. And that's despite Microsoft doing whatever it can to hurt PCgaming. I mean crap...Sony is bigger PCgaming supporter than Microsoft, so that excuse won't fly here
[QUOTE="punkrocker163"]Its not company wars..xsubtownerxSo why is MLB the show called a PS3 exclusive then? Wasn't the argument based on it being a Sony game, therefor making it ok to call it an exclusive even though it's also on the PS2? And wasn't it argued to death that is wasn't an exclusive over here ? :?
[QUOTE="punkrocker163"]Its not company wars..xsubtownerxSo why is MLB the show called a PS3 exclusive then? Wasn't the argument based on it being a Sony game, therefor making it ok to call it an exclusive even though it's also on the PS2?
Very good point, also on PSP
anyway I can't believe anyone would see the 360/pc tie up as anything but good for gaming, if your a PC gamer, you get games that probably would have never seen the light of day on the PC, and for 360 owners, they getthe same thing.
microsoft was smart, they combined alot of the tools and made it easy and profitable to make games that work on both platforms, its good for the company, good for microsoft, and good for the consumer, who loses here
oh thats right, its the 360 owners who Ps3 owners say cannot claim a certain game is exclusive because its on the PC
right
This is "System Wars" NOT "Brand Wars" or "Company Wars". Are all lemmings willing to accept that all the PS2 games out are then considered exclusive to PS3, as they are both owned by Sony, how about all the PSP games? I doubt it. You can't have one way for one console and then another way for the other console, so you would have to accept these terms as well! No one would want that! This defeats the purpose of System Wars. Anyone that wants it like this should just leave and never come back!synonymous with PCs?
bphan
[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="lowe0"] Yeah, but Express is actually pretty important to the business model. The real limitation of the Express IDEs isn't what you can use it for - they're pretty permissive about that, and you can indeed release commercial apps written with it - but that you can't plug anything into it, for example source control. MS knows they don't have to put limits on what you can or can't release with VSE, because Visual Studio is one of the few apps MS writes that is so damn good it pays for itself in time saved.There are features for larger companies that the paid for version helps with so i doubt valve is runnign express when they have so much data to go through, a small company might be able to get away with it, but either way, you might be able to get other C++ compilers, but if i'm not mistaken, to make a windows program you need the windows compiler and libraries which only come with one of the visual studios No, you can download free versions of both the C++, C and Java compilers. They are not the property of MS. MS just happen to develop one quite popular editor for C/C++ (Visual Studio). In other words, you don't need anything from MS aside from a copy of Windows. From a purely theoretical stand point you don't even need a copy of windows, though it would hardly be practical to try to make a game / program without being able to test it :) umm no to use any windows features like directx or any windows system calls you need windows libraries which are built into visual studio. If your making a full fledged game your going to be using more just standard c and you will be using directx calls and system calls, something simple as the networking protocals in c, any kind of windows, are all system calls specific to windows, and you need M$ tools.That said, you don't even need VSE to program on Windows. There are plenty of other C++ IDEs, if you don't plan on using XNA, or if you really hate yourself, you could always fire up a text editor and gcc :cry:.
Mazoch
[QUOTE="bphan"]This is "System Wars" NOT "Brand Wars" or "Company Wars". Are all lemmings willing to accept that all the PS2 games out are then considered exclusive to PS3, as they are both owned by Sony, how about all the PSP games? I doubt it. You can't have one way for one console and then another way for the other console, so you would have to accept these terms as well! No one would want that! This defeats the purpose of System Wars. Anyone that wants it like this should just leave and never come back! in the real world it is company wars though, M$ wants support for BOTH their platforms, but counting all ps2 games as ps3 exculisves would be like counting xbox games as exclusives, its different this is about the current generation of gaming and games coming out, not a companies back catalog.synonymous with PCs?
mgs_freak91
game companies make games for windows and just that alone means game companies have relationships with... Microsoft! not hp, dell, or other PC vendors, basicly the tools they have probably work for writing games for windows and 360 just using a few different libraries, and so long as they use directx primarilly you won't see games on different systems, so Microsoft will likely seek out exclusivels for BOTH of their platforms. They might not have as much control but saying they don't have anything to do with whats happenning with pc gaming other then windows is stupid.[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]
[QUOTE="Mazoch"]
The reason why PC gaming isent owned by Microsoft is because Microsoft has no control over PC gaming.
There's no doubt that 99.9% of all PC games run on Windows (as opposed to Linux, Unix or what have you), however...
Microsoft cannot decide if you should be allowed to create a game for the PC
Microsoft cannot demand payment of license fees for developing a game for then PC
Microsoft does not have the ability to ban you from using your games online if they dont like you
Microsoft do not decide what hardware you are allowed to buy or use with your PC
So yes, PC gaming does generate a profit for Microsoft through the sale of Windows. However unlike the three consoles, Microsoft have no control over, and certainly no ownership of, PC gaming.
Mazoch
No actually they have pretty much nothing to do with the games developed for the PC.Yes, they developed the framework that the game developers build upon. And yes long term they certainly wield an influence since they have a say in how the framework will be developed in the future. However the diffrence is again that when you buy a X360 (or a PS3, or a Wii), the parent comany controls more or less all aspects of what you can and cannot do with that machine.
With a PC, you buy windows. Once that is done MS has no further control on how you use it, what you install or what companies you buy games from. They do not offer exclusive titles.. there's not reason for them to do so. They don't make any profit from the sale of PC games.
On a console (regardless of company and type), in order to create a game you need permission from MS, sony or nintendo. Then you need to pay them for the right to develop a game for the platform. You then need to pay them for the Dev kits needed to develop the games. Once you finished the game you need to pay them a further license fee to release the game on their platform. Last but not least you'll be paying them a small bonus for each copy of your game sold. Why do you think the companies are willing to sell their consoles at a loss?
On the PC? You buy a copy of windows, hell, if you really wanted to could develop the game on linux (though it would make it awfully hard to test :P)
are capable of reading? i said they have no actually control, but they still influence games on windows, they don't just have their feet wet with windows, they maintain relationships with larger companies so the larger companies will support games for windows live. and to make a game for windows, you need windows to compile it, yeah you can write it in textpad on linux but you can't do anything with the text pad, if you made a game in c their are goign to be specific system calls to windows for games and you'll need to have the libraries, so make a running game for windows, you need windows and visual basic, basicly, though you can make parts of the game on other machines, to tie it all together you need M$'s stuff. Unless you want to try launching your game on mac or linux...and to make a game for windows, you need windows to compile it, yeah you can write it in textpad on linux but you can't do anything with the text pad, if you made a game in c their are goign to be specific system calls to windows for games and you'll need to have the libraries, so make a running game for windows, you need windows and visual basic, basicly, though you can make parts of the game on other machines, to tie it all together you need M$'s stuff. Unless you want to try launching your game on mac or linux...savagetwinkieWell, they could always code for WINE, if they're truly masochistic. Besides, have you ever been to a MS dev event? They give Windows away for doing practically nothing. Hell, the copy of Windows I'm running was a gift from MS for watching 3 webcasts. I probably would have gotten Win7 for free too, if I hadn't changed jobs to a company that has zero tolerance for gifts from vendors.
Besides, you only need the libraries to actually build and run the app. If you're coding in C++, the header files will do just fine, and you can get those from the Win32 and DirectX SDKs - you don't need Visual Studio to get the SDKs.
[QUOTE="mythrol"] the term console exclusive has been around SW since last gen (or even before that) and it was NEVER argued over last gen. Everyone used the term all the time. It was an accepted part of system wars. Suddenly this gen comes around and cows see that a lot of the 360's games also release on the PC and so argue against exclusivity and / or using the term console exclusive. The irony of it all, and why I think SW's is so stupid for trying to ban the term console exclusive is that I can this very moment make a thread saying "Compare the Xbox 360's game Library VS. the Playstation 3's game library." and suddenly I'm able to use all those PC/360 games because I'm only talking about the PS3 vs 360 in that thread. Effectively, making ALL those PC/360 games. . .*gasp* CONSOLE EXCLUSIVE. But somehow the actual term "console exclusive" is like some bad word that can't be mentioned in system wars. Tons of people here say "PC is a system too. It should be counted." But let's be honest, when you walk into your local gamestop and you look at the people in there, How many are purchasing PC games? How much of the store is actually devoted to PC games? How come at E3 does the "PC" not a press conference? And let's say PC did have a press conference, who would host it? (Microsoft) Answer: PC is not considered competition. It's on a different level. It's viewed differently. Even though there's a niche market that does use PC's for gaming =/= anywhere near as mainstream or as popular as SW's would like you to believe. That's why there's 1 shelf at Gamestop. As much as Cows want to say "this isn't brand wars", That's EXACTLY what it is. If it's not then why do they always spell Microsoft "M$". IF this isn't about the "brands" then why do so many fanboys HATE the other brands. The sooner SW's acknowledges this, the sooner we can realize the truth and have actual relevant discussions instead of arguing over the verb I use to describe the games that I play. mythrolI see no one has challenged my view.
No one has challeneged it because its crap. The term existed back then and it was also disputed. Its a larger issue now since the majority of games are multiplatform making PC/Console releases much more common.
Sorry, claiming exclusitivity under the weak argument of semantics is just stupid. Does it play the same game? Yes. Is it on more than one system? Yes. How can the same game on more than one system mean its exclusive? Just because its "not a console" hardly changes the fact that im playing the same game.
Yeah but I don't have to keep putting an OS in my computer, and most of what I buy for it is compatable with Windows. For the record, on SW, I play by the rules (well for the most part my friendly mods). The PC is a separate Platform from the 360. But I think it's quite obvious that MS does in some ways gain from games for Windows. That's why they call these games exclusives at E3. Do you really believe they are just being naive?Like if they just stopped by Gamespot's SW board their eyes would be opened to the fact that the PC is a separate platform from the 360. They don't care, or count exclusives. As long as PS3 and Wii don't get __ game, then it's a win in their eyes.It's as silly as saying that because your car runs on petrol, Shell owns your car.
tenaka2
I see no one has challenged my view.[QUOTE="mythrol"][QUOTE="mythrol"] the term console exclusive has been around SW since last gen (or even before that) and it was NEVER argued over last gen. Everyone used the term all the time. It was an accepted part of system wars. Suddenly this gen comes around and cows see that a lot of the 360's games also release on the PC and so argue against exclusivity and / or using the term console exclusive. The irony of it all, and why I think SW's is so stupid for trying to ban the term console exclusive is that I can this very moment make a thread saying "Compare the Xbox 360's game Library VS. the Playstation 3's game library." and suddenly I'm able to use all those PC/360 games because I'm only talking about the PS3 vs 360 in that thread. Effectively, making ALL those PC/360 games. . .*gasp* CONSOLE EXCLUSIVE. But somehow the actual term "console exclusive" is like some bad word that can't be mentioned in system wars. Tons of people here say "PC is a system too. It should be counted." But let's be honest, when you walk into your local gamestop and you look at the people in there, How many are purchasing PC games? How much of the store is actually devoted to PC games? How come at E3 does the "PC" not a press conference? And let's say PC did have a press conference, who would host it? (Microsoft) Answer: PC is not considered competition. It's on a different level. It's viewed differently. Even though there's a niche market that does use PC's for gaming =/= anywhere near as mainstream or as popular as SW's would like you to believe. That's why there's 1 shelf at Gamestop. As much as Cows want to say "this isn't brand wars", That's EXACTLY what it is. If it's not then why do they always spell Microsoft "M$". IF this isn't about the "brands" then why do so many fanboys HATE the other brands. The sooner SW's acknowledges this, the sooner we can realize the truth and have actual relevant discussions instead of arguing over the verb I use to describe the games that I play. XaosII
No one has challeneged it because its crap. The term existed back then and it was also disputed. Its a larger issue now since the majority of games are multiplatform making PC/Console releases much more common.
Sorry, claiming exclusitivity under the weak argument of semantics is just stupid. Does it play the same game? Yes. Is it on more than one system? Yes. How can the same game on more than one system mean its exclusive? Just because its "not a console" hardly changes the fact that im playing the same game.
First let's go over the definition of exclusive.
As per Princeton university: exclusive -excluding much or all; especially all but a particular group or minority; "exclusive clubs"; "an exclusive restaurants and shops"
Wiktionary: exclusive -One that is granted or obtained exclusively; Excluding items or members that do not meet certain conditions; Referring to a membership ...
Or how about we look at the Etymology of the word exclusive to see exactly where it comes from.
From Latinexclusivus- excludere"to shut out, exclude"-ex"out"+ variant form of verb claudere"to close, shut".
Notice something in common? It talks about EXCLUDING something. The origin of the word even means this very thing. I'm not arguing that PC/360 games should be called EXCLUSIVE, even though according to the definitions I have the right to do just that. I'm saying that trying to remove a word that has been in system wars for YEARS just because fanboys don't like the fact that it hurts their console's library is not only stupid and childish, but wrong.
Console exclusive has existed just fine for years. It defines the exact state of a game. On consoles, this game can be exclusively played on . . .
MLB '09 was not even console exclusive since the game can be played on multiple "consoles". HOWEVER, even I don't care that much about how exact to get with the term. When comparing consoles of the same generation to each other if one has a game that can't be played on the other, then that game is without a doubt a CONSOLE EXCLUSIVE. So yeah, sure go ahead and count MLB The Big Show or w/e it's called as a console exclusive. I'm fine with that because it fits within the definition of the word.
Cows will try and argue this point however, because the term console exclusive benefits lemmings more. However just because a term benefits one fanboy more than another, DOES NOT MEAN that the term should be banned or is now somehow false, after YEARS of acceptance.
It only further goes to show how stupid and blind fanboys actually are when they try pull stunts like that.
First let's go over the definition of exclusive.
As per Princeton university: exclusive -excluding much or all; especially all but a particular group or minority; "exclusive clubs"; "an exclusive restaurants and shops"
Wiktionary: exclusive -One that is granted or obtained exclusively; Excluding items or members that do not meet certain conditions; Referring to a membership ...
Or how about we look at the Etymology of the word exclusive to see exactly where it comes from.
From Latinexclusivus- excludere"to shut out, exclude"-ex"out"+ variant form of verb claudere"to close, shut".
Notice something in common? It talks about EXCLUDING something. The origin of the word even means this very thing. I'm not arguing that PC/360 games should be called EXCLUSIVE, even though according to the definitions I have the right to do just that. I'm saying that trying to remove a word that has been in system wars for YEARS just because fanboys don't like the fact that it hurts their console's library is not only stupid and childish, but wrong.
Console exclusive has existed just fine for years. It defines the exact state of a game. On consoles, this game can be exclusively played on . . .
MLB '09 was not even console exclusive since the game can be played on multiple "consoles". HOWEVER, even I don't care that much about how exact to get with the term. When comparing consoles of the same generation to each other if one has a game that can't be played on the other, then that game is without a doubt a CONSOLE EXCLUSIVE. So yeah, sure go ahead and count MLB The Big Show or w/e it's called as a console exclusive. I'm fine with that because it fits within the definition of the word.
Cows will try and argue this point however, because the term console exclusive benefits lemmings more. However just because a term benefits one fanboy more than another, DOES NOT MEAN that the term should be banned or is now somehow false, after YEARS of acceptance.
It only further goes to show how stupid and blind fanboys actually are when they try pull stunts like that.
mythrol
No one cares about semantics. It changes nothing. The plain reality of the fact is that i can pick up a game found "only" on the PS3 or "only" on the 360 without actually onwing the system. To claim exclusion where none exists is greater stupidity than your last line claims. "Years of acceptance" does not make a false claim true.
The term was used a generation ago and it was fought then and it is still fought now despite no reason for it as theres a sticky up top explaining the situation quite clearly. The argument simply comes up more often now due to the greater frequency of PC/Console multiplatform games.
Did you just read what i said? The argument comes up more often now due to the greater frequency of PC/Console multiplatform games.
Sure you did. It's included in the price of every PC that you purchase. Unless of course you mean you STOLE it, in which case you're talking about an illegal activity.mythrol
All my PCs are built from parts, so no OS was included. At a younger age my parents paid for the OS, these days my Uni pays for them through the MSDN program.
In other words I haven't personally spent a penny of Microsoft's operating systems :P
360 and PC are pretty much brothers in the same family ruled by Microsoft. PC is synonymous with Microsoft. Where do you think MAC vs PC ads came from? Who do you think PC is referencing to? Dell? Windows is a requirement to play PC games. That's a fact. Every other thing including every piece of hardware can be substituted with something else. RAM, harddrive, videocards, even manufacturers, HP, Dell, Sony, etc. You can't substiute Windows. You have to have it. It's a requirement.
I see no one has challenged my view.[QUOTE="mythrol"][QUOTE="mythrol"] the term console exclusive has been around SW since last gen (or even before that) and it was NEVER argued over last gen. Everyone used the term all the time. It was an accepted part of system wars. Suddenly this gen comes around and cows see that a lot of the 360's games also release on the PC and so argue against exclusivity and / or using the term console exclusive. The irony of it all, and why I think SW's is so stupid for trying to ban the term console exclusive is that I can this very moment make a thread saying "Compare the Xbox 360's game Library VS. the Playstation 3's game library." and suddenly I'm able to use all those PC/360 games because I'm only talking about the PS3 vs 360 in that thread. Effectively, making ALL those PC/360 games. . .*gasp* CONSOLE EXCLUSIVE. But somehow the actual term "console exclusive" is like some bad word that can't be mentioned in system wars. Tons of people here say "PC is a system too. It should be counted." But let's be honest, when you walk into your local gamestop and you look at the people in there, How many are purchasing PC games? How much of the store is actually devoted to PC games? How come at E3 does the "PC" not a press conference? And let's say PC did have a press conference, who would host it? (Microsoft) Answer: PC is not considered competition. It's on a different level. It's viewed differently. Even though there's a niche market that does use PC's for gaming =/= anywhere near as mainstream or as popular as SW's would like you to believe. That's why there's 1 shelf at Gamestop. As much as Cows want to say "this isn't brand wars", That's EXACTLY what it is. If it's not then why do they always spell Microsoft "M$". IF this isn't about the "brands" then why do so many fanboys HATE the other brands. The sooner SW's acknowledges this, the sooner we can realize the truth and have actual relevant discussions instead of arguing over the verb I use to describe the games that I play. XaosII
No one has challeneged it because its crap. The term existed back then and it was also disputed. Its a larger issue now since the majority of games are multiplatform making PC/Console releases much more common.
Sorry, claiming exclusitivity under the weak argument of semantics is just stupid. Does it play the same game? Yes. Is it on more than one system? Yes. How can the same game on more than one system mean its exclusive? Just because its "not a console" hardly changes the fact that im playing the same game.
Agreed. Completely.The reason why PC gaming isent owned by Microsoft is because Microsoft has no control over PC gaming.
There's no doubt that 99.9% of all PC games run on Windows (as opposed to Linux, Unix or what have you), however...
Microsoft cannot decide if you should be allowed to create a game for the PC
Microsoft cannot demand payment of license fees for developing a game for then PC
Microsoft does not have the ability to ban you from using your games online if they dont like you
Microsoft do not decide what hardware you are allowed to buy or use with your PC
So yes, PC gaming does generate a profit for Microsoft through the sale of Windows. However unlike the three consoles, Microsoft have no control over, and certainly no ownership of, PC gaming.
Mazoch
What do you mean they have no control? They created the Operating System in which those games have to run on. Microsoft creates the standards in which the developers must follow.
[QUOTE="clyde46"]Sure you did. It's included in the price of every PC that you purchase. Unless of course you mean you STOLE it, in which case you're talking about an illegal activity. No, its not stolen. Its completely legit. I built my PC.I never paid a pound for my windows OS.
mythrol
It'll never work. Every time a 360/PC release comes along, cows say it's not exclusive, because they can play it on the PC, even though most of them can't.[QUOTE="MortalDecay"][QUOTE="bphan"]
synonymous with PCs?
z4twenny
LMAO, my pc is powerful enough to play crysis on my 63" flat screen in very high with 2xaa, i know not every cow has a pc that powerful, but most people who buy computers spend enough on their computer that they COULD assemble a gaming pc for the equivalent price ($700 ish) if they wanted to. people who play pc games generally have strong enough pc's to run 360 ports, if a ps3 gamer is also a pc gamer its safe to say their system can probably handle it (unless they're only playing 3-4 year old games)
Your PC cannot max Crysis at 1920x1200 with 2xAA. You are a flat out liar.
So, you're denying that 95% of all games out there needs Windows to run? :lol: Sure, you can run an emulator on Linux, but the game you're trying to run still needs to be supported, which isn't very many at all, and it's more of a hassle than anything else.[QUOTE="MortalDecay"][QUOTE="warmaster670"]
sorry, being a member =/= leading.
warmaster670
And? an xbox needs a videocard to run any of its games, so i guess that means nvidia owns 360 gaming.
pc games also need HDs to run, so i guess seagate owns pc gaming too, as well as whoever makes pc cases since you need those to run pc games too.
Good point, except you know, ATI designed the 360's graphics chips.
[QUOTE="mgs_freak91"][QUOTE="bphan"]This is "System Wars" NOT "Brand Wars" or "Company Wars". Are all lemmings willing to accept that all the PS2 games out are then considered exclusive to PS3, as they are both owned by Sony, how about all the PSP games? I doubt it. You can't have one way for one console and then another way for the other console, so you would have to accept these terms as well! No one would want that! This defeats the purpose of System Wars. Anyone that wants it like this should just leave and never come back! in the real world it is company wars though, M$ wants support for BOTH their platforms, but counting all ps2 games as ps3 exculisves would be like counting xbox games as exclusives, its different this is about the current generation of gaming and games coming out, not a companies back catalog. Yea ok, in the real world it is company wars, but this is gamespot and for the fun and enjoyment of these forums the PC, Xbox 360 and PS3 have been kept seperate, because they are all "systems". You can't change any of this, no matter how many fanboys come into these forums and post a thread similar to the TC's. If by some chance Gamespot makes a forum called Brand Wars or Company Wars then we can all go ahead and start arguing with 360/PC and PC/PS3 exclusives as one system exclusives. But that day hasn't happened yet and the only reason lemmings keep bringing this up is because they are starting to see that for this year there console of choice, at the moment, hasn't had any AAA games. You can't just blow of "system wars" and make it "company wars" just like that, just because its the real world (and when i mean the real world i mean outside of the rules and regulations of gamespot). Then why don't we go to IGN and use there scores here to tell AAA,AA,A's? Why can't we then say that the PS3 has more than or equal to the amount of AAA games for this whole gen now, just because of that one reason - i mean it's in the real world where peopel go to more than one site and get reviews isn't it?synonymous with PCs?
savagetwinkie
You're all missing the point. In System Wars, most discussions are concerning Xbox 360 and PS3 exclusives, and more importantly they are discussing games you can only get if you buy a certain console. These discussions are only about PS3 and Xbox 360. Because of this, I think that in certain topics, Xbox 360/PC exclusives can be counted as a console exclusive. This means that if you just buy a single console and you don't buy a good PC, you are only able to play the game on a certain console. I think this is perfectly legitimate. If two people are arguing over which console has better games, PC is excluded, and therefore an Xbox 360/PC exclusive can be counted as an exclusive for the Xbox 360.
I still don't know why we can't use the term console exclusive, especially when it is logical and Microsoft and Sony are the only ones that are actually fighting in this war. (Ninty is in its own world for many reasons one of them being it is not up to the standards of the other consoles due to its software not being comparable)You're all missing the point. In System Wars, most discussions are concerning Xbox 360 and PS3 exclusives, and more importantly they are discussing games you can only get if you buy a certain console. These discussions are only about PS3 and Xbox 360. Because of this, I think that in certain topics, Xbox 360/PC exclusives can be counted as a console exclusive. This means that if you just buy a single console and you don't buy a good PC, you are only able to play the game on a certain console. I think this is perfectly legitimate. If two people are arguing over which console has better games, PC is excluded, and therefore an Xbox 360/PC exclusive can be counted as an exclusive for the Xbox 360.
Manly-manly-man
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment