Microsoft To Unify PC and Xbox One Platforms (theguardian.com) 214
New submitter Serzen writes: According to The Guardian, Microsoft is planning to end fixed console hardware for the Xbox One as a move towards one ecosystem running Unified Windows Applications. The head of the company's Xbox division, Phil Spencer, said that the Universal Windows Platform would be central to the company's gaming strategy. "That is our focus going forward," he told reporters. "Building out a complete gaming ecosystem for Universal Windows Applications." What this could mean is that the Xbox One becomes more like a PC, with Microsoft releasing updated versions at regular intervals with more powerful processors and graphics hardware. In theory, because games will be written as UWAs, older titles will remain compatible with the new machines.
Then why get a console? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:5, Insightful)
If your PC can run everything that the console can, why bother with the console?
Cost.
Consoles usually represent good value for the processing they provide at time of release.
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:5, Insightful)
Consoles usually represent good value for the processing they provide at time of release.
That was the case with the Xbox 360, which had a triple-core PowerPC back when x86 PCs were still on single-core Pentium 4. Not so much with the current generation consoles, that were kind of "meh" from the start.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft upgraded the software on the XBox One with a Windows 10 kernel a few months ago.
Personally, I thought that the older software with a Windows 8 based kernel was less problematic. I've had some odd Wi-Fi connectivity issues since the upgrade occurred.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't mind using Win10 professionally. It's not my computer anyway, if my employer wants to be a leaking faucet of information and advertising billboard that's not my problem or job responsibility. And I expect to get paid no matter what automatic upgrades break shit at critical moments, in fact it's probably extra overtime - you do get overtime pay, right? I just won't be using it at home except maybe as a Wintendo.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know where did the hate for windows 8 came from.
That's easily explained; you see, most of the Windows 8 hate comes from desktop users without touchscreens and, well, you said it yourself...
I don't know where did the hate for windows 8 came from.
It makes sense that you'd like the Windows 8 interface on a tablet, as it was designed for touchscreens.
Have you tried Windows 10 in tablet mode? It adds space between icons, buttons, and menu options to make them easier to tap, and makes windows full screen (remembering size and position when you pop them off the top of the screen, which you can still do in tablet m
Re: (Score:2)
I have a tablet running windows 8.1.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bahhhhh, your opinion and the 11 fictive people you made up aren't the standard. Your also comparing changing hardware with static hardware.
The Xbox one is one set of hardware. This is much easier for any software developer to QC properly and ensure smooth software operation. It's the reason Xbox 360 and One have been such solid Microsoft products. Sure you could point out past issues or momentary flaws but nothing that stuck out at the software level. It's like Android and iOS. They've had the advantage of
Re: (Score:2)
I like Windows 10 so much, in fact, that I pur
Re: (Score:3)
The Xbox 360 came out in November 2005. What else was even dual core at the time? The Athlon 64 X2 came out in May 2005, the Xeon "Paxville DP" came out in October 2005, the Intel Core Duo would only come out in January 2006, and the Itanium "Montecito" in July 2006. So, I'm pretty sure the typical desktop at the time would be at most a Pentium 4, single core (but hyper-threaded if that counts).
Re: (Score:3)
It's much of a muchness.
A Core2Duo or Quad is plenty good enough for a modern AAA title combined with a modern graphics card like the GTX960. This means that you can get away with spending $200 every few years to keep up to date. Every now and again you might need a new processor, an SSD, or some more RAM, but it averages out. The big plus is that any game (pretty much ever) will run on the latest PC. And of course that it's a PC so it can do other things.
The latest and greatest console costs $400-500 (here
Re: (Score:3)
The problem for me is that when it's time for me to upgrade (I can't run the latest and greatest at max settings) the PCI Express slots are all out of date for the new graphics cards. That means a new mobo, and THAT means a new CPU and RAM, etc. I have only managed to keep the case and power supply through the last 4 iterations.
Re: (Score:3)
This is true although in the past I guess I've managed to buy at the right time. The cards are back compatible: I used a PCIe3 card (GTX750) in a PCIe2 slot and didn't have any problems running games at 1080p a couple of years ago. You'll just miss out on the extra bandwidth and possibly you can get away with it. PCIe2 isn't that much slower than PCIe3 (5 vs 8 GB/s)- at least compared to the doubling from v3 to v4. PCIe3 has been around for 6 years (2010), nobody is using PCIe3.1 yet and the specification f
Re: (Score:2)
We're at a point where you don't need to upgrade that PC anymore just for games. The new AAA titles run very well on average hardware. The only reason to break the bank is to keep up with elitists. I have components below the _minimum_ specs for Fallout4 and it runs great and looks great. I don't have super high resolution though, and anyone worrying about 2K or 4K resolution is already in their own reality along with audiophiles using gold plated connectors on ethernet cables.
Re: (Score:2)
You also don't need to keep up to date. The games that need top end PC are very niche games for the overly dedicated FPS gamer playing set to extremely high resolution. You actually get much bigger bank for the buck by getting more memory or upgrading your hard drive to be solid state, upgrading the video card is very often not necessary. You don't need $2000 skis to go skiing, and you don't need $2000 bicycle to go cycling, and you don't need a $2000 PC to play games, and you you will find people willin
Re: (Score:2)
You never have a remotely current machine. Your console is an obsolete snail when you buy it.
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:5, Insightful)
It might be good news for Sony, at least in the short term, but I'm afraid it's bad news for most console gamers.
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:5, Interesting)
Oddly, I have noted in the past decade that the requirement for constant upgrades is becoming less excessive. Sure, I'm not running things on the highest settings but I certainly get to play and get to play with pretty shiny pixels.
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:4, Interesting)
Because most games are optimized for console and ported for PC, thus the PC requirements are lower.
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:4, Insightful)
Also something of a hardware apex in current hardware architectures. When was the last hardware update that didn't scale out instead of up? The last CPU I bought had the exact same clock speed as the one I bought 5 years earlier, just with more cores. My graphics card? Still rocking GDDR5 with the same bud speed from a decade ago but cuda/shader core count has sky rocketed.
Moore's law was nice while it lastest...
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed that memory and hard disk speed are some of the biggest improvements you can make with games, it's no longer the video card that's a bottle neck. And those improvements do more than help gaming, they'll help all the other stuff you use a computer for.
Re: (Score:2)
Odd, but I see no sign that this is true. PC Ports of console games typically require far more "firepower" than would be implied by the original console. Case in point: GTA IV/V.
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:5, Informative)
Pure bullshit. You don't need yearly hardware upgrades to get a PC gaming experience that blows consoles out of the water. That's a common misconception propagated by console users. That might have been true a decade ago, but not anymore. In addition, most of the gamers I know, including myself, moved away from consoles entirely.
Re: (Score:2)
Yearly hardware upgrades used to be be a thing, but now CPU speed has hit a wall, and game graphics have gotten to a "good enough" point where the super powerful cards don't make things look that much better.
4k and VR stuff is changing that a bit, but for the last decade or so there has been little need for pc upgrades to game.
Re:Then why get a console? (Score:4, Interesting)
There is also the issue of console and PC players in the same game online. Having a mouse in a first person shooter usually grants a huge advantage. Are they going to enforce gamepad use, require the game to run at the same locked frame rate as the console, at the same low resolution etc?
Re: (Score:2)
If they did that every single console on-line game (especially professional games) would be owned by keyboard and mouse people.
The butthurt from the console people would be epic.
There are already places where game controller gamers can compete with keyboard and mouse, the PC gaming world. Show up with a game controller and you will get your ass handed to you. Nobody does.
Re: (Score:2)
Chances are this is more about cutting into Steam than anything else. Likely synchronous release, buy once and play on both platforms *if and only if purchased through Windows store* kind of tomfoolery. This would give them a cut of the PC gaming sales, as well as push PC gamers towards XBox should they decide to add a console to their repertoire.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Valve seems to agree with you - and are betting quite a lot on that being true with the link and the steam-machines and streaming.
They may be right too - I love my steam link. It's actually very nice to sometimes play PC games in the living room on the massive screen. Those that play well on a steam controller anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Software written for a known, precise, platform will be able to use that hardware more effectively and have fewer bugs. I don't know how much better a generic computer needs to be to make up for that specificity, but you might look at how far behind emulators are to get a rough estimate.
Re: No, it's why get a PC? (Score:2, Informative)
In other news, Windows desktop will be replaced by a new UI (codename Subway) that does away with the obsolete and so last century mouse controls and replaces it with a mandatory Xbox controller to provide modern, streamlined experience across all the Universal Windows Apps. New UI will be distributed as a stealth Windows Update patch as soon as Microsoft steals some more bandwidth from your neighbors to host the 10GB of it.
and they will lockout steam / uplay and others (Score:2)
and they will lockout steam / uplay and others also need to pay for XBOX live.
Re: (Score:2)
They will get zero traction with XBOX live in the PC world. DOA.
Console people are trained to pay for the privilege of on line gaming, PC people just laugh and run their own servers (excepting the WOW people, which is at least a little different).
Re: (Score:2)
The market is changing. More and more users will at least have a smartphone, or a tablet, or a laptop, all will soon be powerful enough to run a large majority of games. There don't want to buy extra hardware to just play games. Steam proved to that playing on a PC is a big demand.
Exclusivity is just a nasty trick to force user choice. The company that play this nasty game will probably lost respect from all the frustrated potentiel users. Not a good operation in the long term.
A for the hardware, I disagree
Re: (Score:2)
My issue with current consoles is that I play mine maybe once a month or so. When I boot up, I have to update for 10 minutes before I can actually play a single player game on the hard drive. This is frustrating to say the least....
Re: (Score:2)
> It's like the difference between people that use PCs and Apples not-PCs.
> Simple folks go for the shiny walled-garden of Apple. People that do more than Facebook and cat videos get a PC.
[[citation]]
Gee, why does Facebook have more Macs then Windows boxes??
* http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2015/... [wsj.com]
Re: (Score:2)
After ~25 years of using Windows I'll say Windows blows compared to OSX. OSX sucks _too_, but I find it to be far more consistent.
If, by "consistent", you mean the suck from the last version remains while new suck is consistently added, I have to agree; it's been that way since Lion. I loved Snow Leopard, though. With Windows, at least some of the old suck gets removed with each release, even if new suck is added. That means, while Windows always has sucked, and likely always will, the level of suck has remained more or less the same if you follow the "every other version is garbage" rule; on the other hand, OSX keeps its suck and pil
So the future xboxes will come with PC problems (Score:2, Troll)
... like, for example, graphical artefacts on xboxes released in march-november 2018, and crashes on xboxes from the second half of 2017. But the game runs just fine on consoles from 2019, you just need to upgrade!
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... If it's going to be like PC gaming, you're going to get new games that only work well on the upgraded "XBox Extreme Edition" that has the upgraded hardware.
That kinda sucks if you box an XBox One when it came out and you expected it to be fully supported for five plus years like the older platforms were.
Win win for MS (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They probably still won't let you run Windows apps on your console, even though they could run there. Just games.
Re: (Score:3)
But I really wanna run Office on my xbox! Imagine all the multiplayer spreadsheet action we could have! Fear my PowerPoint skillz!
Re: Win win for MS (Score:3)
Great. Just what we always wanted. Needing a virus scanner on a console....
Re: (Score:2)
I once actually installed ClamAV on a PS2 to check a suspicious download. I had been planning on downloading the thing on Windows, but the site seemed a bit "iffy" so I downloaded it on the PS2 Linux install and ran ClamAV on it, just to be sure.
Re: (Score:3)
And the irony is that even though you installed an antivirus scanner on a PS2, it was to check for viruses for Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Compatibility (Score:3)
older titles will remain compatible with the new machines
Well, 99% compatible; but, really, is anyone worried about the occasional game-breaking glitch in older software titles?
Nobody replays those. Even if someone discovers a classic for the first time, I'm sure the developer will keep up with fixing any bugs introduced!
[end sarcasm]
Steam Competition (Score:5, Insightful)
Looks like the fact that Valve largely controls PC gaming and is doing everything they can to push it away from Microsoft's platform has earned them Microsoft's perceived #1 gaming competitor. Make no mistake, Microsoft knows that gaming is one of the few remaining compelling reasons for consumers to use their platform. Most (but not all) desktop application use cases can be accomplished with a web browser these days. Microsoft knows that if they don't create a reason for game devs to use DirectX 12 then there is a risk that game devs will prefer Vulkan due to the multi-platform targeting (Windows, SteamOS, Android) which will erode the position of Windows as the best PC gaming platform.
Basically this is Microsoft saying that they don't care very much about Sony anymore, they perceive Valve as a greater threat and they are willing to give up the hardware sales that XBox exclusive titles would normally drive to instead incentivize continued purchase of Windows licenses for gaming PCs. It would not surprise me if Microsoft starts licensing the XBox brand the same way Steam Machines are licensed. We could see an "Alienware Xbox" sometime soon.
Re: (Score:3)
This. No serious PC gamer gives 2 hot shits about gimp console-specced games anyway, and by porting Windows games off to Mac and Linux they are saving us from Windows 10.
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically, console gamers also don't give a crap about what snooty PC gamers think about games, because we probably play different titles and play them differently.
Your "no true Scotsman" argument is representative owfhow you play games, and has nothing at all to do with how I play games -- and for me the last thing I want it the annoying churn of constantly installing titles on my desktop machine which over time turns it in
Re: (Score:2)
The point is PC folks don't want to run an OS that has been castrated to run kiddie games. Play whatever you like, but Microsoft shouldn't be cutting Windows' leg off to give Xbox a chance in the race.
Re: (Score:3)
Hell, MS will be FORCED to use Nvidia hardware for the next iteration of consoles if Vulkan takes off like it's looking to and it wants DX12 to stay relevant. Cause if they go for similarly specced AMD hardware again, there's virtually zero reason not to run Vulkan over DX12 as it gives you easy access to the widest array of platforms.
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.pcworld.com/article... [pcworld.com]
So yeah, MS will be FORCED to use Nvidia to run AMD.
Re: (Score:2)
No shit, shit for brains. If the next gen consoles are both running similar AMD hardware there is no incentive to use the DX12 APIs on MS's console. It would make infinitely more sense to use Vulkan. As such, in order to make DX12 have a relevant userbase, they will be forced to go Nvidia for graphical hardware, and probably Intel for CPU, or at least have to pay more for an AMD CPU than if they bundled with the graphics card.
Re: (Score:3)
This is Microsoft finally admitting that their consoles are trying to emulate the PC... badly. Sony is doing the same thing, just not admitting it. The last generation of consoles were lacklustre. The Nintendo DS was the top selling console of the last generation, its because it's casual. Not that there's anything wrong with
Re: (Score:2)
They always claimed their console emulated a PC. It's always run some core kernel of Windows, and the first one was expressly built from COTS computer parts.
What went wrong? (Score:2)
We could see an "Alienware Xbox" sometime soon.
We could Alienware exiting the Steam Machine market. Seriously.
In a bizarre twist of fate, high end Steam Machines are being purchased for Win 10 console gaming. ZOTAC NEN Steam Machine 6th Gen Intel Core i5-6400T Quad-Core CPU NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 8GB Memory 1TB 2.5-inch Hard Drive Dual Gigabit Lan 802.11ac Bluetooth 4.0 ( ZBOX-SN970-P-U) [amazon.com]
While sales of more affordable Steam Machines with very credible specs have been nothing to write home about. Alienware Steam Machine ASM100-2980BLK Desktop Console [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Finally! (Score:2)
This is excellent, I can finally F9 my Excel workbooks on my Xbox!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Another interpretation (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm toying with another possible interpretation of this; that this is effectively MS's way of getting out of the console market, but without the "big bang" announcement that saw Sega ditch things what should have been half-way through the Dreamcast's life-cycle.
There's not much detail out there yet, but based on what there is, it sounds like MS are planning to release what are basically cheap, locked-down PCs on a rolling basis, similar to the Steam Machines. As with those Steam machines, anything which is playable on them will also be playable on a full-sized PC. This is a long-way removed from the traditional console model, where a machine is sent out to sit in the market for anywhere from 4 to 8 years with no hardware changes and where the console-manufacturer funds exclusive titles to grow the installed base (then creams revenue off the third-party titles via licensing fees). In essence, it is just a slightly different type of PC, which sits under your TV (and yes, I know the PS4 and XB1 already resemble that description to a degree, but they were both sold on the "static hardware" model).
It's pretty clear why MS might go in this direction. Their long-standing cash-cows are Windows and Office. Xbox has been a side-line and, in some respects, a slightly risky one, in that it has toyed with undermining one of the key sales-points of Windows (gaming). It was always a sideline which only a company which was very, very confident in its continued monopoly position in its main market (and the continued health of that market) could afford to pursue.
And right now, while that monopoly still looks fairly strong, there are signs of stress; tablets (mostly non-MS ones) have convinced a lot of people to give up their laptops. Ten years ago, Linux was, in essence, NeckbeardOS with no real chance of displacing Windows in the home environment. Now you have Valve and other reasonably serious players throwing a lot of weight behind Linux-powered devices. Win8 flopped and while Win10 is doing better, it isn't doing as well as you might expect given it's basically free. MS still dominate the PC OS market, but it's an increasingly vulnerable domination of an increasingly vulnerable market. Re-emphasizing the Windows PC (be it a laptop, desktop, tablet or box that sits under the TV) as a gaming platform may well be a sensible defensive strategy.
Phil Spencer is, unlike his immediate predecessor, no fool. If he thinks for a moment that what's needed to maintain the health of the Windows cash-cow is to sacrifice the Xbox console strategy on the altar of PC gaming, he will do so in a heart-beat and that, I think, is what we're starting to see happening. Previously-announced Xbox-exclusive series have been announced for PC (albeit Windows 10, and sometimes Windows Store-only) and in some cases are already available.
This shouldn't be a surprise. The Xbox One is a moderately successful console, despite the bad publicity, but MS has no real interest in having a moderately successful console. Don Mattrick's strategy was to use the Xbox One as a doorway for MS to get a presence in every living-room in the country through an all-singing-all-dancing multimedia box, that just happened to also be a games console. That strategy was inane and failed. Spencer has turned the disaster around by refocusing the console in the short term as a traditional console, but it is still only putting out reasonably good numbers and MS have bled market-share to Sony. I just don't see why they'd be excited about staying in that market.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't help thinking this has nothing to do with gaming but is another attempt to make Universal Windows Apps popular with developers.
They'll keep on trying but will never succeed until all users have finally had Win 7 prised away from them.
Re: (Score:2)
Numbers for this? I think tablets were kind of a fad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, they DID take over the world in people's homes. There are families where the netflix/facebook/skype/angry birds use is done on tablets!
Re: (Score:2)
It's true that tablet sales are in a bit of a slump right now but mostly that's due to how they can go longer without needing replacements, a lot of the real improvements you could make go better in phones, and they generall
Wrong (Score:2)
The xbox is not going to become a pc. What they're doing is forcing the low end games that want to be on xbox (like all the trendy 2d indie stuff) to use the UWP apis instead of the native xbox ones, with the promise that they will run on xbox eventually. What they get out of it is that those games will also build for windows phones and the 'windows store' for desktop. The high end console games will still use their native apis, because they need the access to hardware that UWP doesn't provide, but the rest
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
Right now, as a small game dev, you could write for iPhone or Android. There are are reasons to do one or the other first, and maybe, just maybe, you'll write for Windows 10.
Now, if you write for Windows 10, your app is available on Windows 10 and Xbox One.
This isn't just a matter of store size, but which platform has the best chance of generating revenue. That is a function both of store market size and the tendency of people to actually buy stuff from the store.
Also, as a Windows 10 and Xbox One o
Gaben was right (Score:2)
SteamOS was necessary after all!
Submitter is far too optimistic (Score:5, Interesting)
What this could mean is that the Xbox One becomes more like a PC
Yes, but it could also mean that the PC becomes more like the Xbox one with advertisements cluttering up a dashboard. In fact, they've already started showing ads in the menu.
It's more than a little cluelessly optimistic to think that MS will suddenly reverse course and make the Xbox more like the PC. Get ready to have the Xbox dashboard shoved down your throat.
Now if they just added... (Score:2)
Now they just need to add support for desktop apps to Windows 10 on the Xbox One, that way users could play Steam and GoG titles on the console, not to mention emulators.
Not a new idea (Score:2)
Great! (Score:2)
One more reason to avoid both the Xbox and Windows!
Xbox Surface, anyone? (Score:2)
If I wanted a PC (Score:2)
Don't you think I would have bought a PC?
One (Score:2)
Counter to the general trend of comments here (Score:3)
I have always liked consoles for games because of the "it just works factor". You can pick up a title that says its for XBox One and you immediately know that it will work and you will probably have a good experience, and one consistent with the promotional videos etc.
Its entertainment I don't want do work for entertainment. I don't play what patch level of video driver works best, I don't want update libraries, and tune settings. I want to play.
I don't want to have to figure what revision of the console I have. I don't want bring a title home and find it runs like crap on my down level console.
Re: (Score:2)
What, like Arkham Knight?
Re: Great (Score:4, Funny)
It runs great on the PS4...
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a PC, I don't game on it because of EXACTLY that! When I play online games, I'm not evenly matched because my PC simply isn't fast enough, which makes crap play for me and everyone else, so I use a console.
Now what they're saying is that my nice 'its going to be the same hardware fro 8-10 years' console is going to be just another PC ... but worse still an extremely locked down PC?
I knew I should have bought a PS4, but after having 3 PS2s die on me and the Sony rootkit episode and all the other shit they pull I just couldn't force myself to do it. Now basically there are no valid consoles for me to own :( Nintendo seems to be stuck thinking N64 graphics are still the target :(
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
An Xbox is already a low end PC. The OS is now Windows 10.
Oh, well that's grand then. Your Xbox now spends much of its CPU and network bandwidth on phoning in your gaming data to Microsoft.
Game producers would pay a lot of $$$ know who potential high roller gamers are.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surprised if you could select to play only with Xbox Live members or PC as well
AFAICT, xbox live is required for multiplayer in most xbox one games. It's ones of my biggest gripes with the new consoles. Buy a game, and rent multiplayer support.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have the room for a PC then we, the collective we as in every geek that is here on Slashdot, can build you a really really nice PC.
I mean that you say you are using your console because it is faster than your PC. I just cringed reading that.
So...we need to get you a good PC. Then we can talk. Because until then I really did not see much past that. And you seem like a person that wants a good PC. Yeah, we can do that.
Re: (Score:2)
When I play online games, I'm not evenly matched because my PC simply isn't fast enough, which makes crap play for me and everyone else, so I use a console.
You realize it's cheaper to upgrade a PC for gaming than to buy a console? Even the games are cheaper. Also, you can pick games that aren't as graphically intensive (TF2, CS:GO vs COD).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I know you can get a barebones XBOne for $300 or so, but for around $400 you can build a gaming PC that will outperform it and be capable of so much more. Here are a few links I found after just a quick Google:
http://www.toptengamer.com/top... [toptengamer.com]
http://gamingbolt.com/how-to-m... [gamingbolt.com]
http://www.cheatsheet.com/tech... [cheatsheet.com]
http://bgr.com/2014/09/11/chea... [bgr.com]
Re: (Score:2)
As an alternative, you could try running Ubuntu + Steam. This is what I do and I must say that I am never short of good games to play and Linux is working very well on the desktop these days. By the way, it's 100% free of cost and most of the software I run is free as in freedom too.
Judging by your aggravation over Sony jerking you around and now your frustration at getting the same treatment from Windows it seems like freedom might
Re: (Score:2)
Being the 3rd highest selling console, 5th if you count portables, and being gimmicky are not mutually exclusive. Also...being 3rd highest console REALLY isn't saying much when the PS2 and PS are in the number 1 and 2 slots respectively. Also note that the PS2 completely blew the Wii out of water in relation to sales gap (>155 Mil units vs 101.63 Mil units) [wikipedia.org]. That's a difference of more than 53 Million Units compared to the margin of less than 18 Million units between the Wii and PS3. I am not a Sony
Re: (Score:2)
You would have liked the GameCube version better. Same graphics and same story, only with a sane control mechanism and everything about the game was mirrored left to right of what the Wii version was. The game was originally designed for the GCN, complete with Link being left-handed as he was always designed to be. To accommodate for most players being right handed, and wanting Link to be aligned right for right-handed play...they flipped the entire game horizontally.
I still laugh when I remember the loo
Re:Great (Score:5)
And 90% of the devs won't do that, because they're targetting the Xbox. Then they'll decide they can just release it to PC too and do so without adding those settings, because they cost time and money. As proof, I show you every other shitty PC port ever made.
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Just what PC gamers need - games targeted at low end hardware so it will run on a console.
Not necessarily. There's this thing called 'settings' in most games. You know, like higher resolution/quality graphics, physics, etc...
Tell me, does that "Setting" thing:
- Enable graphical features that the devs left out because the console hardware couldn't support it?
- Fix retarded user interfaces that were designed as 10-foot interfaces so they're clumsy and don't show any details?
- Fix retarded control schemes built for a console's gamepad and shoehorned into a keyboard + mouse interface?
- Make levels larger with few or zero loading screens?
- Remove an engine-enforced frame limiter set to 30fps to prevent frameskips and tearing?
- Gracefully support resolutions larger than the average 1080p (or god forbid, 720p) television?
For any benefits they may have, the simple fact is that consoles ruin games for PCs. It used to be that a game was built for the PC and then ported to a console -- starting with a whole cloth and then cutting out pieces that don't fit. Turning that around just means a worse experience for everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
But you'd have to have first class games too, and we haven't had those in a decade.
Correct (Score:2)
This is about their overarching strategy of trying to play the vendor lock-in game like Apple and Google have on phones/tablets/chromebooks/etc, only leveraging their already existent still overwhelming desktop install base instead of trying to create an entirely new platform.
It's about Ads
It's about Tracking
It's about the death of the consumer being the real customer.