PC Gamers are delusional (controversial opinion)

[MDMAlliance]

Dr.Grass said:

MDMAlliance said:

Dr.Grass said:

This is just about the best comment I've read in recent memory.

 

Adding a specific example to what you're saying:

No controller has ever come remotely close to the mouse.  Not even close. I guarantee you that you can take the best 6 FPS console players in the world and put them against my friend (all at once) in Quake 3 and he'd rip them apart without a hitch. Once you've seen a proper FPS player in action with a mouse there's nowhere to hide from the truth.

I also really liked this line:

"Consoles really only have one advantage. Convenience."

I think that bolded line is false.  The reason why boils down to why consoles exist in the first place.  Convenience is NOT the reason consoles and arcade machines were made.  In fact, if you go to an arcade to play games now, you are most definitely not going because it's convenient.  An arcade machine is a type of console rather than a PC.  While people boast that PC can do this, PC can do that, PC has cheaper games, PC has "the most games" (this is highly arguable depending on how you want to define each game and count them).  

If we decided to use PC only for games from the start, the gaming market would not be nearly as large as it is today.  It is also false to believe that any gaming innovation that may come will come to the PC rather than a gaming console.  This is absolutely false.  While a PC can be perfectly compatible with these new inputs, it would #1 cost more to implement #2 be a much bigger gamble as it would be harder to market #3 be hard to find someone willing to make the investment in the R&D and #4 have a hard time getting developers to use it.  Why consoles are better for this is because they are more uniform than PC's are, and they are customized more than PC's are (or have been).  The advantages of consoles are much more than just plain "convenience."  Consoles allowed the market the flourish and mature.  Consoles allowed more innovations to gaming to occur.  

I understand that now may be in a different position as then, given that PC's are playing a bigger role in gaming, it is still true that the console market has a lot more chances to make innovations in gaming than the PC market.  Maybe some time in the future, consoles will disappear and everything will be done by PC's (the old console manufacturers probably developing peripherals for PC) but we are NOT there right now.

Whaaa...?

Arcade gaming is dead. What are you on about?

And, "  The reason why boils down to why consoles exist in the first place.", was never answered in your post.

I did answer that question, you seem to not have paid enough attention.  The answer is because of the market.  It's harder to sell a PC peripheral than it is to sell a proprietary system.  That is/was a truth.

 "It is also false to believe that any gaming innovation that may come will come to the PC rather than a gaming console.  This is absolutely false."

LOL. That's so untrue.

It is true.  You just saying it's untrue is a bad counter argument to begin with.  Although it is also possible that you may have misinterpreted what I meant by that.  What I was saying is that gaming innovation is easier to market and start with a console than a PC (at least historically, it has.  Currently it's still not there yet either)

"Consoles allowed more innovations to gaming to occur.  "

No one is discussing the merits of console gaming or what it has contributed! Geez man, we're discussing which is superior from a gaming poitn of view.

I made this point to reinforce the history of what consoles did and how it still applies even now to a relatively large degree.

"I understand that now may be in a different position as then, given that PC's are playing a bigger role in gaming"

My gawd man, you think PCs used to not play a major role in gaming? 

PC's played a major role in gaming in the past, yes.  They just weren't nearly as big in the market as consoles were.  It still is that way, regardless of what statistics you may pull up.  

"it is still true that the console market has a lot more chances to make innovations in gaming than the PC market"
 

Again, what? The example of Kinect is prudent; It launched on console, but nearly every facet of its existence that has been worthwhile has been implemented by the PC mod community. Of course the device sucked so they gave up on it. 

I'm not arguing that the PC can't have these peripherals and innovations.  I'm arguing that to make it popular and marketable, it makes much more sense to start it on a console first.

"consoles will disappear and everything will be done by PC's"
I'm not saying that, and anyone who does is, I belive, delusional.

Actually, I am saying that it is possible.

In essence, I disagree with the entire ethos of what you wrote.

Most of what I said isn't debateable.  The way you interpreted it may seem like it is, I feel.

Oh, and I should point out that I mean hardware innovations more than I mean software.