The Death Of Console Gaming?

[joeysarks]

Just depends on what kinda gamer you are. I prefer an xbox controller over mouse and keyboard. I find the controller is more comfortable and honestly adds skillgap, cuz I find mouse and keyboard to almost be an aimbot if you use computers all day.

Graphics were never really my concern. I appreciate fine graphics (Halo 4 is looking amazing even for the last generation of Xbox 360 games) but as far as visuals go I think art style is much more important. I certainly don't need to spend 3 grand to feel comfortable with my graphics while gaming. I've heard BF3 guys joshing on people that play low-medium graphics...is it really that big of an issue with some people...enough to dog on others?

Both PC and console have their "noobified" issues though. Halo was becoming casualized from 3 to Reach, but I think 343 realizes that competitive settings only help everyone. Treyarch is taking CoD back over with Black Ops 2, and they are in love with the competitive gaming scene and seem to know what needs to be done, at least somewhat. WoW on the other hand was extremely hard, and with every expansion has been dumbed and watered down in order to include as many people as possible in end game content, at the expense of truly enjoyable experiences. (find party options ruin alot of fun even though they're convenient)

It's back n forth, all comes down to the games and who wants to play what. Look at CS 1.6, it's still goin strong cuz it's so good to the crowd that loves it. As long as there is some kinda market for something we should be good.

Play what you love, love what you play.

 

[0098386]

Halo was becoming casualized from 3 to Reach, but I think 343 realizes that competitive settings only help everyone.

Other way around. With a series like Halo the only way to go is to appeal to more and more people. Believe you me, games are aimed at appealing to the masses first, then the "pro" sector.

From an outside POV (as someone who doesn't really go for Halo) it has always had a casual appearance. I've no idea how true that is but it's a massively simplified FPS. If anything Reach looked to add control complexities in the form of jetpacks/sprinting/shield power up etc.

 

[Renzatic]

As some of you have said before me, it's all about the games. While I don't think consoles are quite on their deathbed just yet, it is pretty much an inevitability that traditional consoles as we know them will go the way of the dodo. What we'll get in their stead are omni entertainment devices that aren't tied to one specific screen or device. We're already seeing the beginnings of this now.

And you know what? I welcome the change.

See, there's nothing separating a console from some powerful tablet that can beam games directly to your large TV set. If the games are good, then the games are good. Simple as that. Think of it like this: if you could play, say, Dark Souls on a big TV via iPad airplay without suffering any loss in quality from it's console equivalent, then what advantage do the consoles have? Controllers? There's no barrier keeping physical controllers away from tablets. Thinkgeek has the iCade, and the soon to be released 8-bitty, which already has a surprising amount of support from iPad game developers. Nothing is stopping some random 3rd party from making a 360-like controller, let alone Apple/MS/Google from developing their own official ones.

So what advantages do traditional consoles have? None. They're machines locked down to a single screen. The awesome iPad/Surface/Nexus of the future can be both a full fledged console that gives you the same big screen experience, or a portable game console much like the 3DS/Vita. Both of these experiences are bundled in one device. It's your decision to either play it at home on the 60", or play it on the go.

Look at the Wii U and it's tablet screen controller wotzit thing that can play not at all watered down games beamed from the console itself. Look at the iPad and Airplay. It's not difficult to predict where the future lies.

Also I really need to get around to playing Dark Souls one of these days. Anyone got a PS3 they can sell me?

 

[Panini]

I agree with everything above. The iPad is easily more capable than the old nintendo gamecube, but games like Super Mario Sunshine and Mario Kart DD have yet to come out. The problem is, most people who are on the mobile market aren't looking for games to invest 10+ hours in. These people are looking for quick-fixes like angry birds that they can play while waiting for the taxi.

The only times when people play "real" games are at home when they've got at least an hour of solid free time ahead of them. When you're at home, portability doesn't really matter as much as comfort, which is why console games are so popular - you play them from the comfort of your couch.

It seems the sheer volume of quick-fix games has spoiled the recent generation such that they don't play a game if it isn't instantly rewarding within the first five minutes. Soon enough, though, when they run out of games like these, they will begin moving to real games - I've seen it happen.

Now, what I'm more worried about is the death of PC gaming...IMO it's the most hardcore of them all and the most at risk...

 

[joeysarks]

Other way around. With a series like Halo the only way to go is to appeal to more and more people. Believe you me, games are aimed at appealing to the masses first, then the "pro" sector.

From an outside POV (as someone who doesn't really go for Halo) it has always had a casual appearance. I've no idea how true that is but it's a massively simplified FPS. If anything Reach looked to add control complexities in the form of jetpacks/sprinting/shield power up etc.

Halo 1 had a big skill gap, as did 2. It was accidental, but it happened. A big reason for this was the nade tricks and button glitches that when mastered would allow better players to dominate. It wasn't supposed to be in the game, but it added incredible skill gap to the game.

Since 3 though Halo has been given tiny crutches to allow the worse player to come out on top randomly. The bad BR spread on 3, the horrible spammy bloom in Reach, being allowed to sprint away from danger, longer kill times. The armor abilities in Reach were game breaking and ruined the game. Armor lock is the ultimate crutch, no one should be able to hit pause in the middle of a firefight, and jetpack allows the player to vanish, but also with the bad DMR mechanic made it almost impossible to get a headshot from below the jetpacker.

Halo 4 looks to be taking the original ideas wrongly implemented by Bungie, and balancing them correctly...or at least as good as you can. Anytime you make a game where people can spawn with different things it's gonna be a little messy unfortunately, which is why most veteran players will stick to the classic and MLG settings.

 

[partyBoy]

by the way...halo is the most overrated game ever, it sucks, there is wayyyy better games outthere

 

[joeysarks]

by the way...halo is the most overrated game ever, it sucks, there is wayyyy better games outthere

It's all personal preference in the end. I love Halo, only game I play besides a little WoW at the end of each game. I've tried tons of games out, but most of them bore me after a few hours if not less. There is a beautiful simplicity in the design of Halo that a lot of people don't understand.

Unless you're referring to RPGS and other genres then it's not really comparable.

 

[Huntn]

Halo 3 was the best coop I've ever played.

The Death of Console Game? I've not watched the video, but what does the video imply will be the death of video gaming? This kind of info would have been helpful in the OP. If you don't have $1000-2000 to spend on a gaming computer, console gaming is the answer, plain and simple. It could be slumps in sales due to the economy and because there is not a lot of original new game content finding daylight. Been-there-done-that could definitely be a factor.

 

[725032]

by the way...halo is the most overrated game ever, it sucks, there is wayyyy better games outthere

Completely wrong

 

[partyBoy]

Completely wrong

Completely right

 

[0098386]

Completely wrong

Completely right

It does get an awful lot of hype. Having recently picked up Halo Reach I'm not seeing how great it's supposed to be. Very simplified (which is okay) but confusing menu. Took a few failed attempts before we realised how to actually play co-op online, and then some more failed attempts in trying to play Firefight. It uses it's own UI system that nothing else does.
I loved playing Halo 1 years ago in co-op but now, I guess I just don't like how Bungie tell stories. Lots of strange naming conventions, events and names hyped up with little payoff, ultra generic enemy, lots of "this is the last game in the series... nope!". The sluggish controls don't help either.

But then there are simple games like TF2 and L4D that are, IMO, much more enjoyable games.

Different boats I guess!

 

[joeysarks]

It does get an awful lot of hype. Having recently picked up Halo Reach I'm not seeing how great it's supposed to be. Very simplified (which is okay) but confusing menu. Took a few failed attempts before we realised how to actually play co-op online, and then some more failed attempts in trying to play Firefight. It uses it's own UI system that nothing else does.
I loved playing Halo 1 years ago in co-op but now, I guess I just don't like how Bungie tell stories. Lots of strange naming conventions, events and names hyped up with little payoff, ultra generic enemy, lots of "this is the last game in the series... nope!". The sluggish controls don't help either.

But then there are simple games like TF2 and L4D that are, IMO, much more enjoyable games.

Different boats I guess!

Please don't judge Halo based on Reach...Reach was not a Halo game. Reach was a complete screw up in terms of the Halo series. They changed key game mechanics that make a Halo game unique (no bloom, no sprint, responsive strafe, etc) the story was bland, they destroyed what great gametype firefight was in ODST, the graphics and art style were not appropriate for the series...I could go on but it wasn't Halo is the key point here. Even Halo 3 had some issues that aggravated a lot of people. Halo 1 and 2 were the only ones true to the Halo name, 3 was close, ODST as well but there wasn't multiplayer.

Halo 4, even with their balancing and tweaks done to armor abilities, and their new mechanics to help appeal to the newer masses, is looking to return to Halo's roots. They're taking weapon balancing influence from Halo 1, strafe, movement speed, and jump height from Halo 3. Master Chief is on a new planet, new enemies, new weapons, new everything. 343 made a point of saying almost everything in the game has been redone to make it their own and keep it fresh. (i think only the few main lines of code that make Halo what it is were saved)

Chalk the hype up to it being around for over 10 years, something lots of people grew up playing and still cherish to this day. Also, from my experience in FPS games for console, it is by far the most fair, balanced, and competitive title out there...or at least was. It was the one and only game on the MLG pro circuit for a long time, and Reach being taken off the pro circuit this year is a testament to how bad it really was. People seem to have high hopes for Halo 4 though, and everyone who has tested it at E3, Comic Con, etc seem to really be enjoying it, and saying it really does "feel like Halo" again.

I'm excited for Halo 4, I urge everyone to give it a try if you have an Xbox around! Not for everyone though I understand, i've included some links though if ur interested.

E3 Campaign Demo

Elamite full gameplay

Wargames (multiplayer preview)

 

[Huntn]

Portable gaming will make inroads in the console arena, however for the near/intermediate future, console gaming will remain superior as long as console manufacturers continues to put out new hardware.

 

[Lil Chillbil]

I just listened to the speech twice and have come to this conclusion. The arcades died because people don't want to be offered crack everytime they play super mario bros. They would rather play at home, the future of gaming is not the death of the console, It is the birth of the digital hub where you can play your games and movies on a console at home and take them with you in your portable system. Consoles aren't dead yet, in fact they're just getting started.

 

[chilly willy]

I do not think consoles will die per se, but you will see hardware convergence wherein they are subsumed into a device that does multiple things.....and you can still have cloud/digital distribution but not lose a home-based console/device for gaming.

 

[LethalWolfe]

I think console hardware probably has one more iteration in it before it disappears or changes radically. Console-style gaming I don't see going anywhere though. Within the next decade I think there's a good chance XboxLive will be a an app available on a variety of hardware devices just like Netflix and Pandora are today. Gaming, like movies and music, will be streaming. I think PSN might be in a tougher spot because would Sony want to have PSN available on non-Sony devices? If they do not it obviously puts them at a disadvantage to MS which I think will be hardware agnostic. Nintendo is in a similar boat as Sony I think.

 

[boy-better-know]

I think console hardware probably has one more iteration in it before it disappears or changes radically. Console-style gaming I don't see going anywhere though. Within the next decade I think there's a good chance XboxLive will be a an app available on a variety of hardware devices just like Netflix and Pandora are today. Gaming, like movies and music, will be streaming. I think PSN might be in a tougher spot because would Sony want to have PSN available on non-Sony devices? If they do not it obviously puts them at a disadvantage to MS which I think will be hardware agnostic. Nintendo is in a similar boat as Sony I think.

It really is a tough one the more you think about it. In years to come there will be a much more stable and extremely fast internet connection for most people so the chances of cloud gaming are very high. So does that mean the the Playstation and Nintendo brands will become nothing more than a service? Who knows how they will deliver games to us, but the demand is undeniably still there. It would appear to me (looking at Nintendo's and Sony's quaterly statements) that the method traditional console manufacturers use to get games to us is becoming less profitable.

Show me an alternative to having a console that can provide deep, cinematic and immersive experiences and then consoles as we know them may be in trouble.

Just another question I want to throw out there;
Do you think that consoles will need to allow user upgradability to keep the hardware one step ahead of the PC market. I mean, what is the point in having a dedicated gaming device that isn't as good for gaming than particular PC's? (Other than obvious factors such as screen real estate and cheapness).

 

[Liquorpuki]

Just another question I want to throw out there;
Do you think that consoles will need to allow user upgradability to keep the hardware one step ahead of the PC market. I mean, what is the point in having a dedicated gaming device that isn't as good for gaming than particular PC's? (Other than obvious factors such as screen real estate and cheapness).

It's really all about the games. Software sells hardware in the game industry so most of these console manufacturers have first party exclusives - Nintendo with their Mario games, XBox w/ Halo, etc. People will buy second rate hardware if that's the only way to play a game they can't play anywhere else. Nintendo manages to stay up despite having console hardware that's always a step underpowered for this reason.

The other thing is the next generation of consoles is trying to integrate disruptive technology - Nintendo with their tablet / AR / etc design and MS with an even more integrated Kinect. PC's don't have these - their benchmarks don't consider much beyond the processor and GPU. I don't know if this Nintendo or MS tech will become more than a niche feature, but if it does, it'll show there's more to gaming than just clock speeds and shaders. It's really all about experiences

 

[LeandrodaFL]

Consoles will never die.

arcade did not die. you can have arcade at home. what died is going out to play games.

 

[partyBoy]

Consoles will never die.

agreed

 

[LethalWolfe]

Do you think that consoles will need to allow user upgradability to keep the hardware one step ahead of the PC market. I mean, what is the point in having a dedicated gaming device that isn't as good for gaming than particular PC's? (Other than obvious factors such as screen real estate and cheapness).

Console hardware doesn't need to be ahead of PC specs in order to be successful. That's one of the great things about consoles is that you buy it once and never have to worry about perpetually sinking money into upgrades, conflicting drivers, updates/patches causing conflicts with hardware, etc.,. A console is a video game appliance and I wouldn't want it any other way. If you want something to tinker with get a PC (or an Ouya).

When I had more free time I loved building gaming rigs and tinkering but now I just want to pop a game in my 360 and play. Any 360 game is just going to work. It doesn't matter how old the game is or how old my 360 is the game will look and play exactly how it is supposed to.

Consoles will never die.

arcade did not die. you can have arcade at home. what died is going out to play games.

No one goes out to arcades anymore therefore arcades are dead.

 

[boy-better-know]

Iteresting point about consoles integrating disruptive tech. Playstation have also introduced playstation mobile. Which looks like it could be good.

 

[0098386]

No one goes out to arcades anymore therefore arcades are dead.

I see what he means, arcades (as in the place where people go to play games) is dead. But the spirit of arcade lives on in cheap, highscore-based, competitive games.

As for upgradeability I think that will eventually happen. It already is in the mobile sector. As I'm sure I said in this thread - I can very well imagine consoles will eventually be nothing more than a set of standards and requirements per manufacturer, that all games made for that console will run at the very minimum but have room to play games at higher resolutions.

I think that'll start in the PC sector rather than consoles, and I think Steam's Big Screen mode will be the start of that.

 

[iMacFarlane]

When I had more free time I loved building gaming rigs and tinkering but now I just want to pop a game in my 360 and play. Any 360 game is just going to work. It doesn't matter how old the game is or how old my 360 is the game will look and play exactly how it is supposed to.

^This. I lost a lot of security in computer based gaming when games I purchased, that are still on sale in most stores, that are still popular and have a large following, "just DON'T work", because Apple felt the need to remove a compatibility layer from their OS.

Just last night, I was looking on MacGameStore for some alternatives to the MAS or Steam, and there are several posts about people who just bought titles complaining that they won't work (due to lack of PPC support).

 

[bellboy1982]

Console game is all about lounging on the couch with the control pad, big bag of chewy sweets and a few beers.

Please don't take this away from me......i'd need to speak to the wife if you did!