Who killed who?

[VirusType2]

I was reading through one of the gaming threads here, where someone said that consoles are killing gaming.

That got me thinking about something.


Did writing kill cave art?

Did movies kill books?

Did music video kill the radio star?

Did computers and consoles kill the arcades in the late 80's?

Did computers kill consoles in the late 80's?

Are console games killing PC games these days? {a little payback)

Did Fast food kill tons of people? I wrote that one as a joke, but now that I think about it... there is the answer.

The answer is 'No'.

These things didn't 'kill' the other - the people that demanded them did by supporting them with their money, and abandoning the old media.

None of these things that I claimed were 'killed' are completely dead obviously, they are just not nearly as successful as they once were.

It's basically like this:

guns don't kill people. people kill people.

So the lesson here is, if you want something to survive, then support it. Each person does make a huge difference. The difference might not be enough to save it, but it just might be.

 

[CptStern]

so in essence you're saying that people shifting their support from pcs to consoles seems to be the fault here ..as you suggest when you say:

So the lesson here is, if you want something to survive, then support it.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

Are console games killing PC games these days? {a little payback)

Yes unfortunately look at the sales! ;(

Did movies kill books?

no but their adaptations 9 times out of 10 do suck in comparison

 

[VictimOfScience]

Nobody is killing anything. Things are just ebbing and flowing as they have for eons. Nothing to see here.

 

[StardogChampion]

Some of your points don't make sense. Cave art was probably early writing. Movies and books are two different mediums. Music videos were just more advertising for singers. And fast food has probably contributed to cancer in millions of people.

Consoles are just dumbing games down. They'll never kill them.

 

[lePobz]

Age kills all those that can't keep up.

 

[Asknoone]

Consoles are just dumbing games down.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

 

[clarky003]

Don't worry folks, technically lots of cash flow into one area just means a barrage of improved clones. Hopefully we'll see some more innovative stuff hitting the PC providing EA doesn't get their fat fingers on anything first, only to be bought up for consoles later :X.

 

[HunterSeeker]

The PC is not dying, its a myth that is far to common. The PC only looks weak if you bandle all the consoles together. It is in a bit of a lowpoint though, as it was last time a new generation of consoles where released.

 

[StardogChampion]

If you want to argue about something, don't say "...what?" or "How does it feel to be wrong?" just list your arguments and have at it instead of dancing around the issue.

Someone doesn't learn... You sum up the stereotypical console crowd.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

The PC is not dying, its a myth that is far to common. The PC only looks weak if you bandle all the consoles together. It is in a bit of a lowpoint though, as it was last time a new generation of consoles where released.

ah true

 

[knut]

You don't seem to learn either. You still haven't managed to get around to replying to your inane points in the MGS threads which have now been shot down by at least 5 or 6 people. You sum up a PC elitest perfectly.

edit:to Stardog, not AHA.

 

[CR0M]

So the lesson here is, if marketing wants something to survive, then the cattle will support it. Each bovine does make a huge difference.

In it's own small, grass stained mind.

 

[CptStern]

the grass is always greener over the next bovine covered hill

 

[VirusType2]

so in essence you're saying that people shifting their support from pcs to consoles seems to be the fault here ..as you suggest when you say:

Right. I think so.

Because, when people buy 3 consoles, they are letting the people selling them know that it is OK.

If 3 consoles succeed, then we will continue to see 3 consoles - even in the next generation.

Therefore, consoler A owner will only get to play certain games, and console B owner will not get to play those games, and vice versa. and with 3 consoles + the PC games, there will be fewer games for each system.

Basically, if there was 1 console, there would be 100% of the console games for it.


I buy PC's, accessories, and PC games because that is what I want and like. So I suppose I am supporting my platform of choice.

Buy what you like.

If you like console games, then go for it, I won't tell you not to, but I think when you buy all of the systems, you are going to make it so in the future, with the next generation, you will have made it so you will have to buy all 3 systems once again in order to play the certain games that only come out for each system.

3 systems succeed, then there will be 3 systems again next go around. However, if 1 system fails, you might only see 2 systems next generation (and many more games and much more success for those 2 systems)


Look at SEGA - they dropped out and discontinued the SEGA Dreamcast, and consoles all together, because their system wasn't successful enough compared to nintendo, sony, and microsoft.

I rather liked SEGA, and I loved my Dreamcast, but how many different consoles that do almost the same thing do we need? Imagine if SEGA was still making consoles, knowing SEGA, we would today have 3 consoles that do basically the same thing.

And it didn't kill SEGA, they are still doing quite well - but now they just make software.


Imagine if there were 2 main operating systems for the PC. That would possibly mean that half the PC games that are out now would be for one of those operating systems, and the other half would be for Windows.

SUCK.


For the record, it looks like PC gaming is picking up, and in a big way TBH.

 

[CptStern]

not with sales of UT3 hovering around the 30K mark and Crysis arguably the most hyped pc game of 2007 only selling in the neighbourhood of 80K

consoles are just a way of controlling the gaming experience, everything is tailored for max profitability so previously niche games like Ranibow 6 become watered down versions that appeal to the masses by eliminating complexity (to a degree) or by offering a commonality that appeals to a wide audience

..pc gaming as a whole demands that the user have some knowledge of computers whereas consoles it's pretty much slap in a disk and start playing. Pc gaming is also wide open in that the general public can develop their own community based on work they themselves create ..console games on the other hand are made to be disposable because nothing limits profitability like users attachment to one or two games per year ..I mean besides Halo how many older games are played on a constant basis? I mean you can find a fairly large community that still plays RTCW Enemy Territory ..how many people still play rtcw on xbox live?

 

[StardogChampion]

You don't seem to learn either. You still haven't managed to get around to replying to your inane points in the MGS threads which have now been shot down by at least 5 or 6 people. You sum up a PC elitest perfectly.

I don't reply when people miss the point, but I'll reply to them if you want.

A PC elitist? I can say with certainty that I've played and owned more consoles/games than you have.

 

[knut]

You don't reply when people miss the point? It's not difficult, man. You make a blunt, meaningless ''point'' yourself and everyone else answered to it, which you ignored. You can think they may of missed the point all you like but unless you reply to them, telling them this, how do you think people are going to deem you're argument credible if you keep pussyfooting around it.

And great, I bet you have. With this really interesting information in mind, it puzzles me even more that you whine in angst against consoles whenever you can.