Outstanding article. Poor console ports cost PC gamers, I'd rather not have it at all versus having a shoddy port. I've played my share of horrible console ports. Resident Evil 4, Star Wars Force Unleashed, bad ports are bad....
Let me say this though. A standard 360 controller connected via USB is just an essential PC gaming peripheral. Everyone should get one. There are just so many games that control better via dual analog, and I find that a great number of games just map automatically to the 360 controller connected via USB. I wish they would just list it as a requirement for certain titles. For example, you could play Street Fighter IV with keys, but then again, you really can't. I'd almost prefer Capcom to just remove the option and force the gamer to use a compatible controller. Just list the supported options on the box, a 360 controller is 39.99, its not a bad peripheral investment. I use mine for various titles.
First off, it's called NBA 2K11. Second, the controls are great. I've been playing the game since October 5th when it came out and it's a fine controlling game...
Often times a decent gamepad fixes a lot of the issues with console ports. What really sucks are the incredibly lazy ports that force to you play with low res graphics, non-customizable control settings, and crazy ridiculous amounts of menus/sub-menus/sub-submenus. I remember playing the first Assassin's Creed I'd just alt+f4 to quit the game because it was about 12,000 times faster than having to navigate all the menus.
One thing I have noticed though is that most developers are getting better at porting to the PC. There doesn't seem to be nearly as many bad ports as there used to be. Maybe they are listening to PC gamers?
I have the feeling that once cloud gaming takes it's place in 5-10 years that the entire notion of a gamin pc is going out the window. All we are going to be left with is consoles, and the console competitors will compete over control systems, user interactivity, and exclusive title rights. Until then ... pc ports are often times ugly.
I keep seeing the cloud pitched as a viable replacement for the gaming PC, but it won't happen. You cannot deliver the horsepower or the latency without a drastic change in the way Internet infrastructure is provisioned and deployed, especially in North America.
I keep seeing the cloud pitched as a viable replacement for the gaming PC, but it won't happen. You cannot deliver the horsepower or the latency without a drastic change in the way Internet infrastructure is provisioned and deployed, especially in North America.
It's debatable, but the future holds the answers I think. I want to agree with you, but OnLive is actually pretty slick. On top of that compression, latency, and bandwidth are only going to improve in the next five to ten years in all major markets.
To me this is equivalent of trying to tell someone about eight years ago that there would be a market for streaming hd television and movies. Some would agree and some would say there just isn't enough juice. But here we are and here is NetFlix.
I think if you look at the 720 DVD, then 1080 BluRay, and whatever is next as stepping stones .. the time between the in home hardware and cloud based streaming solution will become less and less. At some point in the near future you reach a point where it doesn't make sense to have the in home hardware anymore, and industries will just jump straight to the cloud.
Of course I've been wrong a million times before. I'm just saying if I had to gamble my money on what the future holds (invest), I'd throw my money at the cloud and get out of the in home hardware market.
On Demand cloud based gaming is the future for all gaming. Seriously, all of it, console, PC, it won't matter. Its only a debate on how long it will take the internet infrastructure to get there to support it, but it will happen. Its the logical evolution.
Consider this, once it gets to a point where they only develop for the cloud, they get rid of all the proprietary hardware and multiple ports, as well as eliminating the need to support different configurations on the PC end. Think of how much money developers will save on multiple ports and support. Also, the control they will gain by delivering over the cloud on a distributors hardware infrastructure, so piracy gets tricky too. I will miss my graphics cards, but one day, I just won't need em anymore.
Someday all computing will be cloud computing. Every "computer" will just be a smart terminal connected to the internet, where everyone's everything is available behind a login system of some kind. It's an inevitable step in the development of personal computing.
Also: someday cars will drive themselves. It may be ten years from now. It may be a hundred years from now. But, someday it will happen. It's inevitable.
Also: eventually marriage will be a contract for three people rather than two. It may take another dozen generations to realize it, but it's the most practical system, and is thus inevitable.
My point was only that 'eventually' could be a very long time.
I know, I'm just pickin on ya.
We have all had this debate, I think realistically ten years is an easy call, five is a little on the optimistic side. Split it down the middle, I'm betting seven or eight years it is no longer emerging tech, but its just the way we will all do it.
It's debatable, but the future holds the answers I think. I want to agree with you, but OnLive is actually pretty slick. On top of that compression, latency, and bandwidth are only going to improve in the next five to ten years in all major markets.
To me this is equivalent of trying to tell someone about eight years ago that there would be a market for streaming hd television and movies. Some would agree and some would say there just isn't enough juice. But here we are and here is NetFlix.
I think if you look at the 720 DVD, then 1080 BluRay, and whatever is next as stepping stones .. the time between the in home hardware and cloud based streaming solution will become less and less. At some point in the near future you reach a point where it doesn't make sense to have the in home hardware anymore, and industries will just jump straight to the cloud.
Of course I've been wrong a million times before. I'm just saying if I had to gamble my money on what the future holds (invest), I'd throw my money at the cloud and get out of the in home hardware market.
'sup OnLive buddy.
With the notable exception of AT&T U-Verse (Brian and a friend of mine have it, and OnLive is completely unusable for them), top-tier consumer bandwidth is plenty for "Cloud Gaming". I've been using OnLive since launch, and it's only improved over the 11.5 months I've used it.
I would love to see the eventual abolishment of the console and have what I do with OnLive: A small box, not much larger than my cell phone with network in and HDMI out + a wireless controller and/or Keyboard/mouse connectivity for FPSs + access to my entire games library.
Ports aren't QUITE as bad as they used to be now that things like Microsoft's XNA Game Studio exist for PC, but there's still a long way to go.
In forty-five years, we'll see this thread and it will look this hilarious, yet we'll say: "Wow, some of that was sort of right, it was just implemented WAY better."
Sure, broadband is going to be more pervasive, but what about the caps on usage? You mean to tell me those aren't going to cause huge problems for cloud gaming? I'm pretty sure that the mass market of "gamers" are going to want to be able to game all the time and on more than one game.
0
AnnesTripped Up by Libidos and HubrisAlexandria, VAIcrontian
Also: eventually marriage will be a contract for three people rather than two. It may take another dozen generations to realize it, but it's the most practical system, and is thus inevitable.
I'd like to hear the reasoning behind this. Never occurred to me.
Sure, broadband is going to be more pervasive, but what about the caps on usage? You mean to tell me those aren't going to cause huge problems for cloud gaming? I'm pretty sure that the mass market of "gamers" are going to want to be able to game all the time and on more than one game.
It will definitely cause problems, for sure. I'm sure my playing DiRT2 for 14 hours last month (streaming 720p video) created quite a lot of bandwidth. Consumers will need to vote with their feet, and companies will have to think through their PR lenses.
US GSM carriers have implemented caps for cellular data. They caught a ton of flack for it. The CDMA carriers have not, and they get lauded for it.
EVENTUALLY (and I'm talking way out there in the future), completely unlimited home high-speed (real high-speed, not AT&T DSL's 5mbLOLSPEED) bandwidth will be the standard (if companies like Google have their way in particular), rather than the exception like it is now (Charter currently does not have caps on their top-tier service).
It's a long road ahead, for sure. Just look at the video Brian posted. It looks ridiculous in implementation and downright quaint, but if you look at the actual activities portrayed in that video, it's all the stuff we do now.
So I've logged 20 hours of playing NBA 2K11. Its is actually decent on PC. It reeks of console all over it but and I don't think its a bad port at all. Graphics are fine, and dual analog joysticks are actually a written system requirement. A $20 game controller will provide a much better user experience.
I don't think NBA 2K11 has a place in this article, except as an example of how good an obvious console port can be.
However, FIFA 08-11 should, as not only is it heavily modified console port to be not-so-consolish, but its a generation and a half behind console port. Though, I'm thankful that is still supported on PC.
So I've logged 20 hours of playing NBA 2K11. Its is actually decent on PC. It reeks of console all over it but and I don't think its a bad port at all. Graphics are fine, and dual analog joysticks are actually a written system requirement. A $20 game controller will provide a much better user experience.
I don't think NBA 2K11 has a place in this article, except as an example of how good an obvious console port can be.
However, FIFA 08-11 should, as not only is it heavily modified console port to be not-so-consolish, but its a generation and a half behind console port. Though, I'm thankful that is still supported on PC.
You missed the point. I put it in the article because of it being mandatory to have an Xbox controller to play it, no questions asked. If you DON'T have a controller then you can still attempt to play it but you'll fail. There isn't a "warning" saying you NEED a controller. PCs and Consoles are different systems and should be treated as such.
Comments
Let me say this though. A standard 360 controller connected via USB is just an essential PC gaming peripheral. Everyone should get one. There are just so many games that control better via dual analog, and I find that a great number of games just map automatically to the 360 controller connected via USB. I wish they would just list it as a requirement for certain titles. For example, you could play Street Fighter IV with keys, but then again, you really can't. I'd almost prefer Capcom to just remove the option and force the gamer to use a compatible controller. Just list the supported options on the box, a 360 controller is 39.99, its not a bad peripheral investment. I use mine for various titles.
HAWX is another one: I can't imagine playing it without a flightstick.
Some games just need certain controllers. That's cool.
One thing I have noticed though is that most developers are getting better at porting to the PC. There doesn't seem to be nearly as many bad ports as there used to be. Maybe they are listening to PC gamers?
It's debatable, but the future holds the answers I think. I want to agree with you, but OnLive is actually pretty slick. On top of that compression, latency, and bandwidth are only going to improve in the next five to ten years in all major markets.
To me this is equivalent of trying to tell someone about eight years ago that there would be a market for streaming hd television and movies. Some would agree and some would say there just isn't enough juice. But here we are and here is NetFlix.
I think if you look at the 720 DVD, then 1080 BluRay, and whatever is next as stepping stones .. the time between the in home hardware and cloud based streaming solution will become less and less. At some point in the near future you reach a point where it doesn't make sense to have the in home hardware anymore, and industries will just jump straight to the cloud.
Of course I've been wrong a million times before. I'm just saying if I had to gamble my money on what the future holds (invest), I'd throw my money at the cloud and get out of the in home hardware market.
Consider this, once it gets to a point where they only develop for the cloud, they get rid of all the proprietary hardware and multiple ports, as well as eliminating the need to support different configurations on the PC end. Think of how much money developers will save on multiple ports and support. Also, the control they will gain by delivering over the cloud on a distributors hardware infrastructure, so piracy gets tricky too. I will miss my graphics cards, but one day, I just won't need em anymore.
Also: someday cars will drive themselves. It may be ten years from now. It may be a hundred years from now. But, someday it will happen. It's inevitable.
Also: eventually marriage will be a contract for three people rather than two. It may take another dozen generations to realize it, but it's the most practical system, and is thus inevitable.
If said thread is on Icrontic, its not likely to take long.
My point was only that 'eventually' could be a very long time.
I know, I'm just pickin on ya.
We have all had this debate, I think realistically ten years is an easy call, five is a little on the optimistic side. Split it down the middle, I'm betting seven or eight years it is no longer emerging tech, but its just the way we will all do it.
'sup OnLive buddy.
With the notable exception of AT&T U-Verse (Brian and a friend of mine have it, and OnLive is completely unusable for them), top-tier consumer bandwidth is plenty for "Cloud Gaming". I've been using OnLive since launch, and it's only improved over the 11.5 months I've used it.
I would love to see the eventual abolishment of the console and have what I do with OnLive: A small box, not much larger than my cell phone with network in and HDMI out + a wireless controller and/or Keyboard/mouse connectivity for FPSs + access to my entire games library.
Ports aren't QUITE as bad as they used to be now that things like Microsoft's XNA Game Studio exist for PC, but there's still a long way to go.
<object width="640" height="510"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EC5sbdvnvQM?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EC5sbdvnvQM?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="640" height="510" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
In forty-five years, we'll see this thread and it will look this hilarious, yet we'll say: "Wow, some of that was sort of right, it was just implemented WAY better."
I'd like to hear the reasoning behind this. Never occurred to me.
It will definitely cause problems, for sure. I'm sure my playing DiRT2 for 14 hours last month (streaming 720p video) created quite a lot of bandwidth. Consumers will need to vote with their feet, and companies will have to think through their PR lenses.
US GSM carriers have implemented caps for cellular data. They caught a ton of flack for it. The CDMA carriers have not, and they get lauded for it.
EVENTUALLY (and I'm talking way out there in the future), completely unlimited home high-speed (real high-speed, not AT&T DSL's 5mbLOLSPEED) bandwidth will be the standard (if companies like Google have their way in particular), rather than the exception like it is now (Charter currently does not have caps on their top-tier service).
It's a long road ahead, for sure. Just look at the video Brian posted. It looks ridiculous in implementation and downright quaint, but if you look at the actual activities portrayed in that video, it's all the stuff we do now.
I don't think NBA 2K11 has a place in this article, except as an example of how good an obvious console port can be.
However, FIFA 08-11 should, as not only is it heavily modified console port to be not-so-consolish, but its a generation and a half behind console port. Though, I'm thankful that is still supported on PC.
You missed the point. I put it in the article because of it being mandatory to have an Xbox controller to play it, no questions asked. If you DON'T have a controller then you can still attempt to play it but you'll fail. There isn't a "warning" saying you NEED a controller. PCs and Consoles are different systems and should be treated as such.