Console manufacturers and current generation platform holders would probably want all of us to believe that the product they're making really isn't a handicapped PC with a closed software (and usually hardware) model. Taking that into consideration, if anything is going to happen with video gaming in general which could be related to the prophesized end of the PC market, I'm led to believe that eventually we'll reach the stage in which consoles will go the way of the world, and we'll all be streaming data to a screen that's connected to a home network. If only amazing infastructure was a given variable in most countries, though I imagine that's the next stepping stone to a greater realized, technologically advanced international community.
That being said, I play games on a PC because I have freedom of choice, and ultimately have access to a much, much larger library than a majority of succesful or popular consoles combined. Do I really want to wave my arms and physically exert myself when I'm playing games? Fuck no, I have real exercise and applied athletics for that. I'll stick to pressing buttons and moving mice to shoot internet guns, thanks very much.
Do you know what would give you far more freedom of choice and access to far more excellent types in most genres? The answer is: owning both pc and consoles. If you really play games on a pc because you like the freedom of choice, then there is no rational reason other than a thin wallet to refuse to own both pc and consoles.
No matter how you put it, you are missing out superb quality games (the games are actually all that matter in the end) if you only choose one side. As a gamer with a decent economy, there is no good reason to say no to quality games.
I agree with a poster who said : "Yet another prophet" It's just funny to see them all go with weirdos predictions that makes no senses. One last time Lol
The real future is iPod!
I have seen it in a vision... millions of under-powered portables trying to do hi-res graphics with touch screen UI control.
Weirdo enough ? *grin*
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
I agree with a poster who said : "Yet another prophet" It's just funny to see them all go with weirdos predictions that makes no senses. One last time Lol
The real future is iPod!
I have seen it in a vision... millions of under-powered portables trying to do hi-res graphics with touch screen UI control.
With every new console, or console technology for the past 10 years people have been saying that PC Gaming is dead. While there have been some decent consoles, PC Gaming isn't dead. In fact, it is still better than console gaming in many regards. This is especially true when it comes to MMO games. There hasn’t been an MMO that has been really successful on any platform but the PC yet. It makes me laugh every time I see one of these “the PC is doomed” posts or articles.
Now let’s take a look at your premise. You say that because consoles can make the game interactive, it’s going to make them better and more people will play them. This is flawed for many reasons, the first of them being that if I wanted to exercise, I would go outside and ride a bike. I don’t want to exercise though, I want to sit on my couch with a bag of potato chips, a moon pie and a 2 litre of mountain dew.
Now I don’t know about you, but neither seems like a PC breaker to me. But I’m sure you are right. I mean that guy in the video doesn’t look like a complete idiot or anything. For kids, this might be a great gaming system. But please don't call it the death of the PC. Please... For the love of Bob.. Please stop saying things like that.
Console manufacturers and current generation platform holders would probably want all of us to believe that the product they're making really isn't a handicapped PC with a closed software (and usually hardware) model. Taking that into consideration, if anything is going to happen with video gaming in general which could be related to the prophesized end of the PC market, I'm led to believe that eventually we'll reach the stage in which consoles will go the way of the world, and we'll all be streaming data to a screen that's connected to a home network. If only amazing infastructure was a given variable in most countries, though I imagine that's the next stepping stone to a greater realized, technologically advanced international community.
That being said, I play games on a PC because I have freedom of choice, and ultimately have access to a much, much larger library than a majority of succesful or popular consoles combined. Do I really want to wave my arms and physically exert myself when I'm playing games? Fuck no, I have real exercise and applied athletics for that. I'll stick to pressing buttons and moving mice to shoot internet guns, thanks very much.
Do you know what would give you far more freedom of choice and access to far more excellent types in most genres? The answer is: owning both pc and consoles. If you really play games on a pc because you like the freedom of choice, then there is no rational reason other than a thin wallet to refuse to own both pc and consoles.
No matter how you put it, you are missing out superb quality games (the games are actually all that matter in the end) if you only choose one side. As a gamer with a decent economy, there is no good reason to say no to quality games.
That's not true at all. I might be missing out on some of the current generation experience, but I'd like to relegate you to my collection of emulators and roms. The point I'm getting at is that consoles ultimately only offer you one market of game for one particular set of hardware, whereas with PC's you ultimately have access to everything that's worth playing within a reasonable amount of time after release. Sure, I might not be able to emulate 360 or PS3 games, but lets be honest with ourselves: their libraries are large, and mostly filled with shit.
There's also plenty of reason to say no to console gaming in general, and most of that has to do with the manner in which the business is ran. I can understand why people like it, or why they think console gaming is the future of the medium, but I believe anyone who has any experience using a computer to play games would eventually come to the conclusion that these additional boxes we pay anywhere between two and four hundred dollars for are really just handicapped machines that we already own. Sure, they have a few great games. Those great games are and will be available on PC, though I'd admit you may have to wait, either through legitimate means or otherwise.
What was I originally getting at, though? Console gaming is not the future, and MMO's aren't particularly well suited for that environment. The games are almost irrelevant in this conversation, because as I've pointed out, eventually I'll have access to all of them on one box anyway. Why would anyone pay extra for that? The cost to value ratio is not in our favor when we pay for both console and PC hardware or software, unless money or intelligent spending means aboslutely nothing to the individual.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
PC Gaming isn't going anywhere. If anything, Consoles are getting out dated. Good thing about a PC is, you can always upgrade it at minimum cost, Consoles...you have to buy a whole new one..because ofc they release a new updated one every year or two, so you spend another 450 dollars.
Console manufacturers and current generation platform holders would probably want all of us to believe that the product they're making really isn't a handicapped PC with a closed software (and usually hardware) model. Taking that into consideration, if anything is going to happen with video gaming in general which could be related to the prophesized end of the PC market, I'm led to believe that eventually we'll reach the stage in which consoles will go the way of the world, and we'll all be streaming data to a screen that's connected to a home network. If only amazing infastructure was a given variable in most countries, though I imagine that's the next stepping stone to a greater realized, technologically advanced international community.
That being said, I play games on a PC because I have freedom of choice, and ultimately have access to a much, much larger library than a majority of succesful or popular consoles combined. Do I really want to wave my arms and physically exert myself when I'm playing games? Fuck no, I have real exercise and applied athletics for that. I'll stick to pressing buttons and moving mice to shoot internet guns, thanks very much.
Do you know what would give you far more freedom of choice and access to far more excellent types in most genres? The answer is: owning both pc and consoles. If you really play games on a pc because you like the freedom of choice, then there is no rational reason other than a thin wallet to refuse to own both pc and consoles.
No matter how you put it, you are missing out superb quality games (the games are actually all that matter in the end) if you only choose one side. As a gamer with a decent economy, there is no good reason to say no to quality games.
That's not true at all. I might be missing out on some of the current generation experience, but I'd like to relegate you to my collection of emulators and roms. The point I'm getting at is that consoles ultimately only offer you one market of game for one particular set of hardware, whereas with PC's you ultimately have access to everything that's worth playing within a reasonable amount of time after release. Sure, I might not be able to emulate 360 or PS3 games, but lets be honest with ourselves: their libraries are large, and mostly filled with shit.
There's also plenty of reason to say no to console gaming in general, and most of that has to do with the manner in which the business is ran. I can understand why people like it, or why they think console gaming is the future of the medium, but I believe anyone who has any experience using a computer to play games would eventually come to the conclusion that these additional boxes we pay anywhere between two and four hundred dollars for are really just handicapped machines that we already own. Sure, they have a few great games. Those great games are and will be available on PC, though I'd admit you may have to wait, either through legitimate means or otherwise.
What was I originally getting at, though? Console gaming is not the future, and MMO's aren't particularly well suited for that environment. The games are almost irrelevant in this conversation, because as I've pointed out, eventually I'll have access to all of them on one box anyway. Why would anyone pay extra for that? The cost to value ratio is not in our favor when we pay for both console and PC hardware or software, unless money or intelligent spending means aboslutely nothing to the individual.
So if you are missing out a current generation of consoles, it means that right now, if you refuse to buy consoles, you are volunteerily reducing your access to superb games; therefore, you have less freedom, what's not true about that? Whether or not they may be emulated in the future does not oppose the fact that the freedom until then is diminished.
There are of course questions regarding multiplayer support, whether or not the emulations are emulated in a manner that is bug-free and smooth, how much of the good games the emulation "community" covers in a good manner, how much lack of self-respect you need to actually leech through emulation. Questions that you should be able to answer better than I can.
As for not paying for it since you see it as just a worse version of a pc that you already own: why pay to see a movie that is just a worse version of classical litterature? To elaborate: all major movie themes have been dealt with in a more analytical and thorough way through books. Maybe we still choose to watch movies because there are other aspects that make it worth paying for?
To think of it, you don't even need to buy a PC really, you can just fabricate the components yourself and program everything from scratch if you really want to.
What you are paying for when you buy a console is not just a "thing", you are also paying for the work they've put into creating something which enables you to easily (within one minute) play games through a TV-monitor with a controller, that ergonomically works very well with those games, from your couch.
While I would not be surprised if several computer-savvy people could create just that in less than an hour, I know that and I and most other people would not be able create that in days.
Furthermore, you are paying to support a diversification of gaming. While the choice for controlling in the game may sound redundant, it is a major aspect of how a game is designed and feels. In connection with the mmorpg FFXIV, it was evident that it is very hard to convince people to use a controller connected to their PC; therefore, there is a reason to be worried that the whole "control your game other than through a mouse and keyboard" may be lost if console gaming dies. Sure it may still live on in a smaller quantities, but such technology would probably have significantely less chance to get good games compared to the chance in todays console market. As a gamer, diversification is something to be aspired.
If console gaming dies, there is reason to be afraid of that a major part of the good platform games, beat-em-ups, adventure games and rpgs dies with it. It is currently unthinkable to have something like Castlevania generate enough income to support future titles in a PC-market using keyboard and mouse. Controls are really that important and so are gaming cultures. Not being able to survive under such circumstances doesn't mean that "Castlevania" is "inferior" or "bad"; it is just largely a consequence of how it would change the feel of the game to something worse and how costumers are used to buy their games. Anyone who has ever played a Castlevania game knows that they are renowned for superb quality, excellent music and fun game play. Never met a person who has hated that series without trying it, and that includes PC-players I know who had never tried it until I forced them to try.
Analogously, no gamer should want PC-gaming to die either. There is a very special but large kind of strategy games and mmorpgs that simply would not work without a keyboard and mouse. A gamer should not want that variation of such games to dissappear. I am inclined to believe that people are not very keen on using keyboard and mouse on their consoles.
To summarize: the whole "PC vs Console" war is pointless. As a gamer you should want an environment which supports and encourages maximum diversity.
PC Gaming isn't going anywhere. If anything, Consoles are getting out dated. Good thing about a PC is, you can always upgrade it at minimum cost, Consoles...you have to buy a whole new one..because ofc they release a new updated one every year or two, so you spend another 450 dollars.
More like every 5 years, not the 1-2 years you claim it to be. As for the rest of your argument: I've already dealt with that through my earlier posts.
When we actually make holodecks, I can easily see players physically playing their "characters". I'll be the first one in line. Until then, the thought of running in place or swinging a fake sword in front of my tv is not of any interest to me.
When it comes to consoles and fps/mmo, I prefer the much better control my mouse and keyboard give me (although to be honest it doesn't matter for fps because I frankly suck at fps games).
For me at least, pc gaming is going nowhere anytime soon. Consoles are great for fast-paced sports games, arcade style fight games, and simpler adventure games, but that's about as far as I'm interested in going.
I'll just end by stating that I was a console gamer through most of my youth. Coleco Vision, Nintendo systems, Sega systems, 3do, jaguar. All of them were great. But when I moved to PC gaming I felt that I had "graduated" to a whole new level with far more gameplay options and better graphics than any console could ever provide. I still feel this way, despite today's best consoles.
PC gaming is coming to an end. The FPS genre continues to shrink into a void of what was. Most FPS games that do release for the PC are mere Console ports. One of the only things that give the PC some real sustain are MMORPGs. However, even MMOs are starting to to make it to the console: DC Universe Online. It makes sense for companies, as the market towards the console crowd is much greater.
In the console realm, motion activated gameplay is the next step, e.g., Wii, Kinect, etc.
Imagine the spawn of a real "hardcore" server, where players are actually forced to physically run in place in order to get your character to move. Imagine.
Motion-Sensory MMOs.
Heh seriously ? Funny how you see ads of the Kinect and such with 6 pack athletes running around , the point is that 80% of console gamers are fat lazy bastards (Me included) and even I have problems playing 2 hours a day on my Wii. Motion sensors reminds me of the Virtual Boy from Nintendo , all hype and stuff , in the end it failed miserably. Everyone I know who owns a Wii barely plays it 5 hours a month. Those with a 360 not even one has a kinect , and the PS3 , I only know a few who got the motion sensor dildos. I can already see PvP with motion sensors , breaking everything in the living room and then throw your PS3 dildo sensor out the window due to the fact you just got ninja looted. Motion sensors are great for family gatherings like Xmas while waitting on midnight to open gifts , family members compete over Wii for fun , but playing a MMO from scratch with only but motion sensors ? I can't see this happening , the point of a MMO is to make it as comfortable as possible for the player so that player can play for hours straight and feed the DEVS money on item shops.
Console manufacturers and current generation platform holders would probably want all of us to believe that the product they're making really isn't a handicapped PC with a closed software (and usually hardware) model. Taking that into consideration, if anything is going to happen with video gaming in general which could be related to the prophesized end of the PC market, I'm led to believe that eventually we'll reach the stage in which consoles will go the way of the world, and we'll all be streaming data to a screen that's connected to a home network. If only amazing infastructure was a given variable in most countries, though I imagine that's the next stepping stone to a greater realized, technologically advanced international community.
That being said, I play games on a PC because I have freedom of choice, and ultimately have access to a much, much larger library than a majority of succesful or popular consoles combined. Do I really want to wave my arms and physically exert myself when I'm playing games? Fuck no, I have real exercise and applied athletics for that. I'll stick to pressing buttons and moving mice to shoot internet guns, thanks very much.
Do you know what would give you far more freedom of choice and access to far more excellent types in most genres? The answer is: owning both pc and consoles. If you really play games on a pc because you like the freedom of choice, then there is no rational reason other than a thin wallet to refuse to own both pc and consoles.
No matter how you put it, you are missing out superb quality games (the games are actually all that matter in the end) if you only choose one side. As a gamer with a decent economy, there is no good reason to say no to quality games.
That's not true at all. I might be missing out on some of the current generation experience, but I'd like to relegate you to my collection of emulators and roms. The point I'm getting at is that consoles ultimately only offer you one market of game for one particular set of hardware, whereas with PC's you ultimately have access to everything that's worth playing within a reasonable amount of time after release. Sure, I might not be able to emulate 360 or PS3 games, but lets be honest with ourselves: their libraries are large, and mostly filled with shit.
There's also plenty of reason to say no to console gaming in general, and most of that has to do with the manner in which the business is ran. I can understand why people like it, or why they think console gaming is the future of the medium, but I believe anyone who has any experience using a computer to play games would eventually come to the conclusion that these additional boxes we pay anywhere between two and four hundred dollars for are really just handicapped machines that we already own. Sure, they have a few great games. Those great games are and will be available on PC, though I'd admit you may have to wait, either through legitimate means or otherwise.
What was I originally getting at, though? Console gaming is not the future, and MMO's aren't particularly well suited for that environment. The games are almost irrelevant in this conversation, because as I've pointed out, eventually I'll have access to all of them on one box anyway. Why would anyone pay extra for that? The cost to value ratio is not in our favor when we pay for both console and PC hardware or software, unless money or intelligent spending means aboslutely nothing to the individual.
So if you are missing out a current generation of consoles, it means that right now, if you refuse to buy consoles, you are volunteerily reducing your access to superb games; therefore, you have less freedom, what's not true about that? Whether or not they may be emulated in the future does not oppose the fact that the freedom until then is diminished.
There are of course questions regarding multiplayer support, whether or not the emulations are emulated in a manner that is bug-free and smooth, how much of the good games the emulation "community" covers in a good manner, how much lack of self-respect you need to actually leech through emulation. Questions that you should be able to answer better than I can.
As for not paying for it since you see it as just a worse version of a pc that you already own: why pay to see a movie that is just a worse version of classical litterature? To elaborate: all major movie themes have been dealt with in a more analytical and thorough way through books. Maybe we still choose to watch movies because there are other aspects that make it worth paying for?
To think of it, you don't even need to buy a PC really, you can just fabricate the components yourself and program everything from scratch if you really want to.
What you are paying for when you buy a console is not just a "thing", you are also paying for the work they've put into creating something which enables you to easily (within one minute) play games through a TV-monitor with a controller, that ergonomically works very well with those games, from your couch.
While I would not be surprised if several computer-savvy people could create just that in less than an hour, I know that and I and most other people would not be able create that in days.
Furthermore, you are paying to support a diversification of gaming. While the choice for controlling in the game may sound redundant, it is a major aspect of how a game is designed and feels. In connection with the mmorpg FFXIV, it was evident that it is very hard to convince people to use a controller connected to their PC; therefore, there is a reason to be worried that the whole "control your game other than through a mouse and keyboard" may be lost if console gaming dies. Sure it may still live on in a smaller quantities, but such technology would probably have significantely less chance to get good games compared to the chance in todays console market. As a gamer, diversification is something to be aspired.
If console gaming dies, there is reason to be afraid of that a major part of the good platform games, beat-em-ups, adventure games and rpgs dies with it. It is currently unthinkable to have something like Castlevania generate enough income to support future titles in a PC-market using keyboard and mouse. Controls are really that important and so are gaming cultures. Not being able to survive under such circumstances doesn't mean that "Castlevania" is "inferior" or "bad"; it is just largely a consequence of how it would change the feel of the game to something worse and how costumers are used to buy their games. Anyone who has ever played a Castlevania game knows that they are renowned for superb quality, excellent music and fun game play. Never met a person who has hated that series without trying it, and that includes PC-players I know who had never tried it until I forced them to try.
Analogously, no gamer should want PC-gaming to die either. There is a very special but large kind of strategy games and mmorpgs that simply would not work without a keyboard and mouse. A gamer should not want that variation of such games to dissappear. I am inclined to believe that people are not very keen on using keyboard and mouse on their consoles.
To summarize: the whole "PC vs Console" war is pointless. As a gamer you should want an environment which supports and encourages maximum diversity.
I'll be honest and say I didn't read the majority of your post. Most of that has to do with how much I disagree with you, but ultimately comes down to the fact that you're defending companies who are looking to milk the industry and the gamer for whatever they can, under the guise of contuinal production of quality games (which can certainly be argued). If you're trying to convince anyone that they should spend money on botch PC and console gaming because they love good content, after having been directed to the fact that the vast majority of released games will eventually be playable on a PC, I can't help but think you're a shill, or an individual who simply doesn't have to worry about money. Let's all be honest: this is an expensive hobby. Unless money is no obstacle, individuals are forced to choose one or the other for gaming purposes, and in all situations you simply get more for what you spend if you go the PC route.
As far as freedom is concerned, can I play SNES, Gensis, NES, Playstation (and some PS2 games), with an XBOX 360 or PS3? Sure, if you completely handicap the reason you buy one of those consoles, which is the network of gamers it gives you access to. Again, the game libraries don't even matter here. It will all be accessible on a PC at some point in time, and speaking as to the present, I'm simply capable of doing more with a PC than any individual console, or even a collection of them. So, yes, it is true that you're handicapping your freedom in more way than one if you're purchasing solely from the console markets, and that freedom ranges from the games you can play to whatever else you can do with the money you own. Again, the cash to value ratio simply doesn't exist.
It'd be great if I could spend hundreds upon hundreds, probably even thousands, of dollars a year for the games and the boxes that run them. Financially speaking, it simply isn't reasonable and is much as I view the F2P market, you're probably being taken advantage of if you're paying for privilege (despite how much you may enjoy it). It's a bottom line situation.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
With F2P becoming the new trend I want to see how consoles will deal with revenue.
They definetly can deal with it, but will they? Or will they be like the record industry and fail to see whats coming and deny the changes. They cant sell your console at a loss without selling games.
Comments
Do you know what would give you far more freedom of choice and access to far more excellent types in most genres? The answer is: owning both pc and consoles. If you really play games on a pc because you like the freedom of choice, then there is no rational reason other than a thin wallet to refuse to own both pc and consoles.
No matter how you put it, you are missing out superb quality games (the games are actually all that matter in the end) if you only choose one side. As a gamer with a decent economy, there is no good reason to say no to quality games.
"Yet another prophet"
It's just funny to see them all go with weirdos predictions that makes no senses.
One last time
Lol
Let's all just predict things based on subjective feelings generated from our own pleasures and wants. I can see the future so clearly now...
The real future is iPod!
I have seen it in a vision... millions of under-powered portables trying to do hi-res graphics with touch screen UI control.
Weirdo enough ? *grin*
Well, actually... Here's a screenshot of Infinity Blade on iPhone. And there are already MMOs for iPhone and Android. Hopefully big studios'll keep focusing on the PC market, though.
<childish, provocative and highly speculative banner about your favorite game goes here>
With every new console, or console technology for the past 10 years people have been saying that PC Gaming is dead. While there have been some decent consoles, PC Gaming isn't dead. In fact, it is still better than console gaming in many regards. This is especially true when it comes to MMO games. There hasn’t been an MMO that has been really successful on any platform but the PC yet. It makes me laugh every time I see one of these “the PC is doomed” posts or articles.
Now let’s take a look at your premise. You say that because consoles can make the game interactive, it’s going to make them better and more people will play them. This is flawed for many reasons, the first of them being that if I wanted to exercise, I would go outside and ride a bike. I don’t want to exercise though, I want to sit on my couch with a bag of potato chips, a moon pie and a 2 litre of mountain dew.
The second reason that this is flawed is because it has been done before on the pc and no one really thought it was something they wanted to do. http://www.instructables.com/id/Play-WoW-with-a-Wiimote/ and http://wow.joystiq.com/2011/07/07/15-minutes-of-fame-full-body-wow-with-motion-sensing-software/
Now I don’t know about you, but neither seems like a PC breaker to me. But I’m sure you are right. I mean that guy in the video doesn’t look like a complete idiot or anything. For kids, this might be a great gaming system. But please don't call it the death of the PC. Please... For the love of Bob.. Please stop saying things like that.
I predict there will be more predictions.. I see DOOOOOM in our future!
That's not true at all. I might be missing out on some of the current generation experience, but I'd like to relegate you to my collection of emulators and roms. The point I'm getting at is that consoles ultimately only offer you one market of game for one particular set of hardware, whereas with PC's you ultimately have access to everything that's worth playing within a reasonable amount of time after release. Sure, I might not be able to emulate 360 or PS3 games, but lets be honest with ourselves: their libraries are large, and mostly filled with shit.
There's also plenty of reason to say no to console gaming in general, and most of that has to do with the manner in which the business is ran. I can understand why people like it, or why they think console gaming is the future of the medium, but I believe anyone who has any experience using a computer to play games would eventually come to the conclusion that these additional boxes we pay anywhere between two and four hundred dollars for are really just handicapped machines that we already own. Sure, they have a few great games. Those great games are and will be available on PC, though I'd admit you may have to wait, either through legitimate means or otherwise.
What was I originally getting at, though? Console gaming is not the future, and MMO's aren't particularly well suited for that environment. The games are almost irrelevant in this conversation, because as I've pointed out, eventually I'll have access to all of them on one box anyway. Why would anyone pay extra for that? The cost to value ratio is not in our favor when we pay for both console and PC hardware or software, unless money or intelligent spending means aboslutely nothing to the individual.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
PC Gaming isn't going anywhere. If anything, Consoles are getting out dated. Good thing about a PC is, you can always upgrade it at minimum cost, Consoles...you have to buy a whole new one..because ofc they release a new updated one every year or two, so you spend another 450 dollars.
Moot point. Consoles have been trying to become PCs for years.
So if you are missing out a current generation of consoles, it means that right now, if you refuse to buy consoles, you are volunteerily reducing your access to superb games; therefore, you have less freedom, what's not true about that? Whether or not they may be emulated in the future does not oppose the fact that the freedom until then is diminished.
There are of course questions regarding multiplayer support, whether or not the emulations are emulated in a manner that is bug-free and smooth, how much of the good games the emulation "community" covers in a good manner, how much lack of self-respect you need to actually leech through emulation. Questions that you should be able to answer better than I can.
As for not paying for it since you see it as just a worse version of a pc that you already own: why pay to see a movie that is just a worse version of classical litterature? To elaborate: all major movie themes have been dealt with in a more analytical and thorough way through books. Maybe we still choose to watch movies because there are other aspects that make it worth paying for?
To think of it, you don't even need to buy a PC really, you can just fabricate the components yourself and program everything from scratch if you really want to.
What you are paying for when you buy a console is not just a "thing", you are also paying for the work they've put into creating something which enables you to easily (within one minute) play games through a TV-monitor with a controller, that ergonomically works very well with those games, from your couch.
While I would not be surprised if several computer-savvy people could create just that in less than an hour, I know that and I and most other people would not be able create that in days.
Furthermore, you are paying to support a diversification of gaming. While the choice for controlling in the game may sound redundant, it is a major aspect of how a game is designed and feels. In connection with the mmorpg FFXIV, it was evident that it is very hard to convince people to use a controller connected to their PC; therefore, there is a reason to be worried that the whole "control your game other than through a mouse and keyboard" may be lost if console gaming dies. Sure it may still live on in a smaller quantities, but such technology would probably have significantely less chance to get good games compared to the chance in todays console market. As a gamer, diversification is something to be aspired.
If console gaming dies, there is reason to be afraid of that a major part of the good platform games, beat-em-ups, adventure games and rpgs dies with it. It is currently unthinkable to have something like Castlevania generate enough income to support future titles in a PC-market using keyboard and mouse. Controls are really that important and so are gaming cultures. Not being able to survive under such circumstances doesn't mean that "Castlevania" is "inferior" or "bad"; it is just largely a consequence of how it would change the feel of the game to something worse and how costumers are used to buy their games. Anyone who has ever played a Castlevania game knows that they are renowned for superb quality, excellent music and fun game play. Never met a person who has hated that series without trying it, and that includes PC-players I know who had never tried it until I forced them to try.
Analogously, no gamer should want PC-gaming to die either. There is a very special but large kind of strategy games and mmorpgs that simply would not work without a keyboard and mouse. A gamer should not want that variation of such games to dissappear. I am inclined to believe that people are not very keen on using keyboard and mouse on their consoles.
To summarize: the whole "PC vs Console" war is pointless. As a gamer you should want an environment which supports and encourages maximum diversity.
More like every 5 years, not the 1-2 years you claim it to be. As for the rest of your argument: I've already dealt with that through my earlier posts.
When we actually make holodecks, I can easily see players physically playing their "characters". I'll be the first one in line. Until then, the thought of running in place or swinging a fake sword in front of my tv is not of any interest to me.
When it comes to consoles and fps/mmo, I prefer the much better control my mouse and keyboard give me (although to be honest it doesn't matter for fps because I frankly suck at fps games).
For me at least, pc gaming is going nowhere anytime soon. Consoles are great for fast-paced sports games, arcade style fight games, and simpler adventure games, but that's about as far as I'm interested in going.
I'll just end by stating that I was a console gamer through most of my youth. Coleco Vision, Nintendo systems, Sega systems, 3do, jaguar. All of them were great. But when I moved to PC gaming I felt that I had "graduated" to a whole new level with far more gameplay options and better graphics than any console could ever provide. I still feel this way, despite today's best consoles.
Heh seriously ? Funny how you see ads of the Kinect and such with 6 pack athletes running around , the point is that 80% of console gamers are fat lazy bastards (Me included) and even I have problems playing 2 hours a day on my Wii. Motion sensors reminds me of the Virtual Boy from Nintendo , all hype and stuff , in the end it failed miserably. Everyone I know who owns a Wii barely plays it 5 hours a month. Those with a 360 not even one has a kinect , and the PS3 , I only know a few who got the motion sensor dildos. I can already see PvP with motion sensors , breaking everything in the living room and then throw your PS3 dildo sensor out the window due to the fact you just got ninja looted. Motion sensors are great for family gatherings like Xmas while waitting on midnight to open gifts , family members compete over Wii for fun , but playing a MMO from scratch with only but motion sensors ? I can't see this happening , the point of a MMO is to make it as comfortable as possible for the player so that player can play for hours straight and feed the DEVS money on item shops.
I'll be honest and say I didn't read the majority of your post. Most of that has to do with how much I disagree with you, but ultimately comes down to the fact that you're defending companies who are looking to milk the industry and the gamer for whatever they can, under the guise of contuinal production of quality games (which can certainly be argued). If you're trying to convince anyone that they should spend money on botch PC and console gaming because they love good content, after having been directed to the fact that the vast majority of released games will eventually be playable on a PC, I can't help but think you're a shill, or an individual who simply doesn't have to worry about money. Let's all be honest: this is an expensive hobby. Unless money is no obstacle, individuals are forced to choose one or the other for gaming purposes, and in all situations you simply get more for what you spend if you go the PC route.
As far as freedom is concerned, can I play SNES, Gensis, NES, Playstation (and some PS2 games), with an XBOX 360 or PS3? Sure, if you completely handicap the reason you buy one of those consoles, which is the network of gamers it gives you access to. Again, the game libraries don't even matter here. It will all be accessible on a PC at some point in time, and speaking as to the present, I'm simply capable of doing more with a PC than any individual console, or even a collection of them. So, yes, it is true that you're handicapping your freedom in more way than one if you're purchasing solely from the console markets, and that freedom ranges from the games you can play to whatever else you can do with the money you own. Again, the cash to value ratio simply doesn't exist.
It'd be great if I could spend hundreds upon hundreds, probably even thousands, of dollars a year for the games and the boxes that run them. Financially speaking, it simply isn't reasonable and is much as I view the F2P market, you're probably being taken advantage of if you're paying for privilege (despite how much you may enjoy it). It's a bottom line situation.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Is the OP joking?
With F2P becoming the new trend I want to see how consoles will deal with revenue.
They definetly can deal with it, but will they? Or will they be like the record industry and fail to see whats coming and deny the changes. They cant sell your console at a loss without selling games.
Own, Mine, Defend, Attack, 24/7
Not saying it will not sell well but... BFBC2 sold 4 times as often on PS3 and 5 times as often on Xbox360.
Best case scenario the publishers just continue to bring PC ports, worst case they ditch it.
But PC gaming will of course live on be it just for RTS/MMORPG/SIMS/INDIE genres.