PC gamers moving to consoles - id Related content
-
Exclusive - Quake Wars: Enemy Territory - Comparison video
-
Latest Enemy Territory: Quake Wars screenshots
- Review Enemy Territory: Quake Wars [59]
£7.99
RRP: £49.99
In stock
Buy Online
Order before 5.30pm and receive your order the next working day!
Advertisement
PC gamers moving to consoles - id News
Xbox 360 PC PlayStation 3 News by Rob Fahey
The traditional image of the FPS player as a PC gamer with keyboard and mouse doesn't necessarily hold true any more, according to id Software's director of business development, Steve Nix, who told Eurogamer this week that he believes many hardcore PC FPS players are now getting their jollies on consoles.
Chatting to us in London about the upcoming console version of Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, Nix said that id is "absolutely" seeing a shift to consoles, even from formerly diehard PC gamers.
"I know that I have friends who are considered core gamers, who years ago were just keyboard and mouse guys - now, when a game ships on all platforms, they buy the console version, even though the PC version is sitting there and they have a PC that would run it perfectly well. It's just their preference," he explained.
Designer Greg Stone, who has been working on Quake Wars at Nerve Software, chipped in to agree. "For me, I'm exactly what he's describing - I'm a guy that used to play on PCs, and now I'm totally console. It's so much money to keep up with the bleeding edge of technology on the PC, and it really just is easier to take a console and say, well, this is good enough. I think that's the way it is for me, and for a lot of people at this point in time."
However, Nix was keen to point out that he's describing a limited trend - and that there's still plenty of space for the PC in the games market, even if FPS games are certainly no longer entirely a PC-centric genre.
"There are plenty of people who are diehard mouse and keyboard guys that may never go to console, and also right now, if you have the highest of high-end PCs, you're generally going to get a better visual experience," Nix said. "There's no console out there that's as powerful as a God machine right now, with a Quad-Core and a GeForce 8800 - it's very hard for any console to compete with that."
"So you still have PC players, and some players are just console guys, but have players moved over? Absolutely. We love PC gaming, and we continue to support PC gaming - but you can't ignore the market realities and the size of the console market these days."
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars came out last September on the PC, and we rather liked it - to the tune of eight out of ten. The console versions are being developed by Nerve (360) and Activision Underground (PS3), and will be out in the coming months. You can read all about how they differ from the PC version - and why they might actually be better - in our shiny new preview.
Advertisement
Are you excited about Enemy Territory: Quake Wars on Xbox 360/PlayStation 3?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Thanks!
Related Games
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars
Latest Features
-
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars Review [59]
-
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars Preview [32]
-
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars Interview [21]
-
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars First Impressions [57]
-
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars Interview [20]
Latest Videos
Exclusive - Quake Wars: Enemy Territory - Comparison video [4] 30 June, 2008
Latest News
-
Wedgwood: Metacritic strain "ridiculous" [50]
-
Quake Wars demo lands on Live [14]
-
Retailers talk Quake Wars console date [4]
-
Console teams doing Quake Wars demos [1]
-
Enemy Territory Beta 3? [4]
Latest Screenshots
30 June, 2008 [2]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-44 of 44
Poster
|
Kill_Crazy
20/03/08 @ 07:58
0
I'm the type of user he's talking about. I previously went for mid ranged pc gfx cards and the major turning point for me was hd consoles. Until hd capable consoles came along the resolution outputted by the ps2 or xbox was no where near sufficient for use on large monitor/ tv screens. Once you get above that 800x600 mark things really improve imo. Also, with the price of 42"+ screens dropping all the time it looked like a realistic alternative. So far I have not been disappointed and also got rid of desktop pc (i'm sure they generate their own dust) and got a laptop for all other pc related things. For me keyboard isn't an issue (although do prefer it and would like choice on consoles) as long as you know that your playing against others with same controls.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 07:59
|
|
0
Well I did. Was a hardcore pc gamer but since the xbox I have been moving more towards a console gamer. I'd say it's about 50-50 now. It's just that the xbox made an effort of getting those PC type games onto consoles and show that consoles can do near pc level graphics imo. If it wasn't for games like ES, Doom 3, Halo, SC, etc. I probably never would have even looked at them.
However, if this casual gamer thing continues on, I'll probably move back as the PC is the only platform these days that gives that kind of marketing the finger. It's also something different. I bought the xbox to play Halo in coop with my mates. This is still basically why I go for console versions, the social experience. The PC just has other strengths that make it more attractive for other type of games (like lanning, AOEII is fantastic over the lan). EDIT: I think another thing that contributed was that after playing UT'99 for years, every other MP game on the pc just felt lame & dull.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 08:00
|
|
Kill_Crazy
20/03/08 @ 08:05
0
Good point on the casual games issue - can't stand (most of) them.
Can't consoles play via lan or is it just crap? Loved UT and also Battlefield series - COD4 MP is a good substitute for me as i'm more hardcore than HARDCORE.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 08:06
|
|
0
Right now I have a Duo Core with a 8600gt and a 360
Games for 360: The Orange Box, COD4, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Lego Star Wars 2 and Halo 3 PC: Crysis and played Bioshock on it. I'm going to South-Korea one of these days and leaving it all behind and getting a duo core 9600/8800gt PC (to stand in for the 360) and an PS3 when I get there. Having a PC and a 360 wasn't the best choice for me. They are both excellent but too much of the same new games. PS3 and PC looks like more diversity to me. What I want from id is a new Doom. I loved Doom 3.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 08:22
|
|
Mentalist(air)
20/03/08 @ 08:33
0
Surely anything Stevie Nix says is little more than rumours...?
Well, they'd be either Rumours (1977) or Sweet Little Lies (1987)
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 08:34
|
|
0
About half the fun I get out of games is from mods or from modding. My current installation of Oblivion is at least 10 times the game it was on release day...! As long as consoles continue to limit the player's freedom and creativity, I'll stay on PC.
(That sounds more dogmatic than I really am. Console games do have their merit - if you have little time for gaming, and little inclination towards tinkering, then probably console is where you should be. But I believe it's not an "either-or" matter - both worlds can co-exist, and I'd be sad for either to vanish.) |
|
sickpuppysoftware
20/03/08 @ 09:09
0
I like both. I prefer quirky homebrew, modable games and cerebral games on the PC.
Pick up and play games or games suited to pads I'll play on consoles. Sure some FPSs I'm choosing to play on console but the vast majority will still be on PC. |
|
0
kelly's_h: Yeah, 8600GT is terrible GPU :-/
Pulsar_t : Yeah, I presume you are writing this post on your marvelous console .-) Well, I am probably not big gamer, considering I spend around 10% (average) of my time at PC playing games (well, sometimes 80% - 90% - when I buy some addictive game once in a month or two). But when I am building a new PC, I am usually doing it with games in my mind. Well, nowadays it means basically only thing - powerfull GPU (i.e. 8800 or ATi equivalent). Otherwise the results (components) are usually the same. In the other words - for approximatelly $200 I can play every new game, and at the same time nearly every old PC game (I am talking about you, Warhammer 40 000 Chaos Gate, you naughty little incompatible piece of thrash), PS1 game, N64/SNES/NES/whatever platform game. P.S. StarCraft 2 will be on consoles? If not, consoles don't matter XD |
|
login_name
20/03/08 @ 09:36
0
Funny, I went the other way. I was exclusively console until Half Life was released. From that point I moved ever so slowly towards PC gaming but it wasn't until this current generation of consoles that the PC became my main focus. The huge increase in FPS/gun centric titles has pushed me away from consoles. If PCs and their games are so bad, why are consoles so desperately trying to imitate them? All I see is old tech and ideas shoe horned into a tiny box, I don't see the point. I'd rather have the full experience than a watered down, fisher price version. The Wii (and the odd 360 title) is the only thing keeping me playing on consoles.
It's always been easier to play on a console, that's the whole point of a console, this is not a new concept and getting PCs and their games running has never been easier from my experience. It used to be a major pain getting anything to run and run well, but these days I rarely have a problem. I've had more issues with my 360 and Wii than I have within the last 3 years of PC gaming. Although the gap between PC and console games has blurred more in the past few years, I still feel both offer unique gaming experiences that make both a viable platform to any serious gamer. Oh and from a former champion of the controller, keyboard/mouse is and always will be better than a controller for FPS games (and that includes the Wii). |
|
Jigglybean
20/03/08 @ 09:36
0
LOL what rubbish. Playing an FPS on a PC beats the crap out of any console experience. And now that you can plug a 360 controller into the PC - what is the point of a console?
|
|
0
I sort of agree with what he says in terms of a general trend, but personally I'm not ready to give up on PC gaming just yet. A mouse and keyboard plus a high resolution on a monitor are always going to be better (imho) than a pad for anything in the FPS or RTS genre. And since you can use a 360 pad to play games on your PC, the experience in other game genres should be almost identical.
The only snag in that is the hardware demands - Nix is right that being a PC gamer is great if you have a Dual/Quad-core processor and a Geforce 8800GT or better in your machine, but anything less than that and you have to make certain compromises in game settings which is always going to feel like a let down, despite the fact it may actually be better than what you're getting on a console. And getting / maintaining your PC to the high standard demanded by modern games is expensive - you don't just buy one and know it'll last you for 5-7 years; you have to realise that you'll probably need to shell out for at least one new graphics card in that space of time if you want to keep pace. I can readily understand why some former PC enthusiasts would drop out of the hardware race. Then again, there's nothing on a console that quite matches playing Crysis on Very High settings. :)
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 09:40
|
|
0
I agree with the above three posters. The thought of playing a FPS on a console gives me the chills.
I used to be more of a console person, I still am to a certain extent owning all current gen consoles, however I've got a decent PC and there is no way I would ever choose to buy a FPS on a console over the PC version. The only main console FPS game I've played is the Halo series (mainly for local co-op). |
|
Vermillion3000
20/03/08 @ 10:01
0
For my money there's one major advantage to console gaming - comfort.
Mouse and Keyboard is indeed a terrific interface but they are not very mobile. I like being able to crash out on my sofa or armchair in a variety of mildly comatose poses whilst playing games. Mouse and Keyboard kind of enforces a hunched over desk posture. That's a bit too much like being n work for me.. |
|
0
Yeah, if I look at all the FPS games I've played on consoles (and not including the Metroid Prime series because they're actually quite a different beast), then the only two that really stand out in my memory as being great are Black and Timesplitters 2.
By contrast, the PC has offered Half-Life 2 + Episodes, Doom 3 (I liked it, okay!), FEAR, STALKER, Far Cry, Crysis and Bioshock. Yeah there's some overlap with consoles there, but the only big game in that genre I've missed out on is Halo 3 - and I'm sure that'll get ported over eventually. But the key thing for me is that every PC game is, on average, £15 or so cheaper than it's console version. More if you wait a bit. So whilst I might pay more to keep my graphics card refreshed on a regular basis, I'm actually able to save almost as much as that costs me if I buy, say, 10-12 games in that same period of time. |
|
GitSomE UK
20/03/08 @ 10:11
0
What Darren said... still in two minds about whether to upgrade my PC the only thing I'm considering the upgrade for is STALKER 2
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 10:13
|
|
0
I must admit I did play more games on my PC a few years back but now I have the three current generation consoles I've hardly played any games on it, I think BioShock was the last one in fact.
I got fed up of upgrading just to run the latest games as they were intended to be seen. Sure you can customise PC games far more than console ones but who wants to play a game on medium settings with no AA when you know there's a high detail setting that looks better? Not me, that's for sure, and recent games like Crysis won't even run at a decent framerate on high-end PCs according to CustomPC magazine who test all the latest graphics cards with a number of graphically intensive games, including Crysis. Admittedly that game is the exception rather than the rule but it seems ridiculous that there's a game on the PC that very few people will actually see running at its best. I'm sure I'll buy a new PC eventually, probably later on this year actually, but right now I'm not in any rush to as most of the stuff I want to play is actually on the consoles anyway. The PC doesn't have anything to rival Bully, Eternal Sonata, Lost Odyssey, PGR 4, GT5 Prologue or Virtua Fighter 5 for example and I'd rather play Devil May Cry 4, FIFA 08 and SEGA Superstars Tennis on a console than a computer. P.S. If the only good reason to own a PC for gaming is for first-person shooters then I'm selling mine right now! I can't think of a genre that is less interesting at the moment but then the FPS is stuck in a bit of a creative rut with very few developers doing anything innovative or exciting. If I play another military-themed FPS, I swear I'll throw up!!! Even Crysis is little more than a mediocre FPS dressed up in fancy visuals and physics, there's little new on show IMO. |
|
login_name
20/03/08 @ 10:18
0
And getting / maintaining your PC to the high standard demanded by modern games is expensive - you don't just buy one and know it'll last you for 5-7 years
Something Microsoft has replicated rather well in the console market... Seriously though, borked machines aside, how many 360 gamers who swear by their cheap little box went out and bought a HD-DVD drive, a new/bigger overpriced HDD, extra controllers (wheels, sticks, more pads etc), headsets, cams, chatpads, memory cards, Live! service, picture packs/themes, DLC or even a second console either due to faults or "upgraded" models? This all adds up. Combine that with the price difference between the games (£40-£60 on 360 to £19 - £30 on PC) and the whole price issue doesn't even come into it in my opinion. |
|
0
I agree with the fact that FPS are not meant to be played on console. I agree that computers and FPS make you upgrade more than needed. And my case is indeed that I haven't had an upgrade since ATI9600 (I can still play Dark Messiah of might and magic, on average setting). I love the PC.
But after working 10+ hours a day on the PC, if I am to get near a CPU based machine, it has to be different, so that's one of the main reasons I played more on the Wii and PS2 lately than on the PC. I also don't want to spend 200Euros yet for a graphic card - this money I can use to buy 4 games at least, for Wii and PS2.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 10:28
|
|
monkie_king
20/03/08 @ 10:36
0
I don't know why more console FPSes don't support standard USB mouse + keys, then the whole argument is pretty much over. I think there's still no official mouse support on 360 (may even be against TRCs?) but PS3 games have no excuse really. Half Life on PS2 was great with mouse + keys, for example. It does require a bit of creativity with the seating arrangements I guess, though there are hybrid joypad + mouse setups around (bit like Metroid Prime 3's setup).
|
|
Kirly_Wombat
20/03/08 @ 10:37
0
Yawn.
And some people arent switching, and some play on both. There have been articles on this online/ in gaming mags for years, and its still the same arguments/excuses wheeled out time after time. The gaming PC is still here, and isnt going anywhere, even if it turns into a fringe platform (which personally I think is unlikely). |
|
0
I've done the exact opposite.
I got a cheap second-hand 360 recently, and played a few games on it, then when my PC needed upgrading i considered grabbing a decent HDTV instead. But then I realised that, with the games costing twice as much on release, and a monthly bill for online gaming, it actually didn't work out any cheaper. Also... There are just plain more games on PC that I want on all three of the consoles put together, let alone just one. Also, mouse/keyboard damnit - Whatever your thoughts on controlling FPSes, it's definitely better for strategy games. Why the hell doesn't the 360 support computer mice? It already supports keyboards. That has to be one of the most retarded design decisions i have ever seen.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 10:40
|
|
0
Well, I am one of those the guy is talking about. Was a full blown pc-gamer for years, but since I got XO I have barely touched my pc as far as games come. I still play WOW ofcourse but thats about it.
Its just so much more comfortable and easy to play with a console, Im tired of all the tweaking and stuff with pc. And no the guy isnt saying that pad is better than a mouse and and keyboard so pls stop whining guys. He is just saying that many gamers nowdays settle for a pad even tough it isnt the fastes and most accurate solution, there just is so many other upsides. ps: NOBODY CARES what kind of PC you are running, so you dont have to bust up your online-p*nis buy spamming your specs.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 10:44
|
|
monkie_king
20/03/08 @ 10:52
0
Nithron, with the original Xbox, they were definitely frightened that it would be perceived as a cut-down PC. I don't think MS wanted a mouse or keyboard anywhere near it to avoid that association, and also to avoid a massive slew of lazy PC ports (like the strategy games you mention, which aren't the kind of title MS wanted the Xbox to be known for).
I think those dangers are well passed now, and since it's such a strong FPS platform it seems crazy to keep enforcing the constraint. You can at least use a USB keyboard for messaging, I've found out. I suppose it would horribly unbalance online play too, if some people were on mouses. edit: hmm, on second thoughts, are modern FPSes really playable with just a two-button-and-wheel mouse? Or do you need a 5 or 6 button one for all the melee and grenade and zoom and crouch functions? And in that case do you need proper mouse drivers, rather than standard USB HID support?
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 20/03/08 @ 10:56
|
|
DanWhitehead
20/03/08 @ 11:05
0
However, if this casual gamer thing continues on, I'll probably move back as the PC is the only platform these days that gives that kind of marketing the finger.
I still have no idea how "casual gamer" is defined, but you do realise that the world's leading "casual" games format is - and probably always will be - the PC, right? |
|
0
"edit: hmm, on second thoughts, are modern FPSes really playable with just a two-button-and-wheel mouse? Or do you need a 5 or 6 button one for all the melee and grenade and zoom and crouch functions? And in that case do you need proper mouse drivers, rather than standard USB HID support?"
That's what the keyboard is for! :) |
|
0
The PC/Console debate always seems to boild down to FPS' and the KB+M argument.
I'm with Darren on this one, I really could not care less about them. Don't get me wrong, there are a handfull of good ones I love playing (Half-Life, Bioshock, erm...Condemded?), but sometimes its like PC gamers talk about them as if they are the only type of game out there. Me, I'm more into Dynasty Warriors, Devil May Cry, Survival Horror, JRPG's, Turn-based Stratergy, shoot-em-ups and platform games. Not much call for a KB+M in any of those. |
|
0
People are keen to point out that you have to spend money to keep up with the latest pc gear when console gamers have to spend at least £5-20 more per game - I'd rather have the latest tech and not get ripped off on software then have an average tech console with no customization in-game and awful controls for fps and rts games - it balances out over time. If you look at all the big fps titles like cod4 and ut3 they out sell console versions ten-fold. I had a 360 and sold it to get a beasty pc for simple but necessary features. Graphic optimization, in-game tweaking (configs etc - why not have 100+fps when you can get it), more social tools available (plus a keyboard helps).
I only bought a 360 for the casual games it had to offer, but quickly got bored (and why should u pay to play online? rip-off). I find it very hard to believe that any hardcore fps or rts gamer would ever ditch their pc for a console - its like getting in a car and shifting into gear but your going in reverse. |
|
0
Yeah, I can see why Microsoft would want to avoid that. But they should really release a patch to add mouse support now.
I mean, DC, PS1, PS2, and PS3 all supported mice. But it was incredibly hard to find one. Now that Microsoft finally released a console with real honest-to-goodness USB ports on it, so you could easily get hold of one if you wanted to, they didn't bloody well bother supporting them. Argh, i wanted to play Rez with a mouse, damnit! |
|
TurboBailey
20/03/08 @ 17:58
0
I did as well. My PC costs soooo much money to keep running. Constant upgrades. Constant faffing about.
Bought as PS3 and my PC hardly ever gets used for gaming. I will just let it retire in peace. It still runs pretty much every game, i just dont have time to play it.. well apart from CIV4 |
|
subtlesnake
20/03/08 @ 23:27
0
I've always been a PC gamer, but bought a 360 for Halo 3, and have picked up Virtua Tennis 3 and a few arcade titles so far. I wanted to get Mass Effect, but the (relatively) poor reception turned me away, and right now I'm just looking forward to Fable 2 and maybe GTA 4.
While I have got used to using a controller for FPS in single player, the lack of responsiveness in multiplayer is a big issue for me – having to rely on radar to find out where you're been shot from, really isn't much fun, and makes me miss the incredible fluidity of TF2. Add in the fact that console games are £10 - £15 more expensive, and it's hard to justify going for the console version. As far as upgrade costs go, spending £1500 over 3 years, or £500 a year, seems to be what's required to stay at the high end, which I'm fine with. |
Comments: 1-44 of 44
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
