Never said that. I said that they aren't meant to be looked at per se. Modding them is frowned upon in general (opent he case, void the warranty type thing.) As for emp_WAAAHHHH, er I mean emp_noob, I'm referring to console gaming in general. I use the 360 as my example because I know more about it. I can explain why developing for the PS3 might be harder and why people like Carmack would avoid the PS3 if they could, but that's it. I've no real interest in it as a console. The only exclusive game on PS3 that I want is uncharted among theives...otherwise I'll pass on bluray and poorly designed games (ghostbusters on PS3....oh. Yeah...that's fucked up.)
Yeah but Rage is still being released on the PS3 though, unless you're talking about Valve where their budget is based around Gabe's eating habits & can't really afford to hire developers for other consoles. I'm pretty sure they patched that or are going to patch it (Ghostbusters that is). Besides most games that are on 360 end up getting ported to the PS3 & PC with added features & in some cases complaints & bugs fixed. MAG: it's somewhere between Empires & Renegade with 256 players, meaning it's awesome & oh so sexy!
No, I mean Carmack...who has said he'd avoid it if he could. He hates working on it, simply because developing for the Cell is hard, and their graphics chip is not as powerful. If used right the Cell can be nice, but it's hard to use it right...people would sooner work with 3 powerful cores than they would work with distributing work across 8 relatively underpowered cores, and one mildly underpowered core....that, and the PS3's dev tools are sorely lacking. For ghostbusters, I don't believe so. Because the game ended up being very graphics heavy, and the PS3 graphics chip is considerably less powerful than the 360s, the game was rendered at 520P or something lower. No real amount of patching that will fix it, they need to rewrite a bit of the game...but hey, they might have somehow fixed it...I've not been following it after the initial "you did what with the PS3 version!?" reaction everyone had.
Its also the reason you can't play Empires, ZM, Smashball, Dysotopia, etc. etc. Probably about 90% of the games I play are mods. No mods = huge downside IMO.
Consoles and PCs are different platforms with different advantages. MAG looks awesome, and Zipper Interactive made one of my awesome childhood games: Recoil. Back to discussing the game at hand: The gun designs are silly, recoil apparently doesn't exist and infinite fuel jet packs, wooooo. Also, nausea much?
Do you really want to play a game where you fire 5 shots and float off into oblivion, or run out of fuel after 20 seconds of flight and float off into oblivion? I'll suspend my belief for the pure awesome.
Well no. The recoil issue is solvable, the fuel issue isn't. but whatever And to derail again: XP Ultimate Edition > All (except, maybe, 7) Also: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/escalation-gameplay-shattered-horizon/58509?type=flv Gets my vote of approval!
Mods are a niche market at the end of the day. Emp see 200 players on at a time. Halo 3 ODST for example sees millions on at a time. For those who love mods, go for it...but 98% of people out there don't want to deal with mods. Ultimate ediiton...you mean the hacked up version? I'll skip...
But doesn't modding add other things? Like .. People getting into the industry? I mean, Icefrog will do a game together with Valve as an example. Oh and almost forgot. CSS and Garrysmod have plenty of players. And they were mods from the start.
They were mods to start, but became full on games. As for getting attention...what's to stop you from say writing an XNA (or Sony's equiv) game for a console and putting it up? Same amount of experience...
Except it went from "whenever we patch it" to "you paid money and we need to maintain it" - huge difference.
You missed my point, and repeated yourself. The difference is that when you pay for something you get SUPPORT. If it crashes, you can potentially get someone from Valve to look into it. In fact, they have to look into it. When it's a mod, the answer will likely be "your problem, not mine"
I duno what mods you've played. Oftentimes I've found when you ask for help with a mod having issues you generally get an explanation of the bug if it's commonplace, some help and you can talk with developers. It's not true for all mods, but it is for most I've played. Developers want you to play their game, they don't gain money from it, so there has to be some reason they do it. With mainstream games they're obligated to give support, but they don't care if your game works because they already have the cash. See: All EA games with any bug/crash issues.
Consoles get far more games and sales than PC games now, with the exception of a few flagship games (orange box, crysis) developers are mainly moving to consoles. Consoles are popular with devs and most gamers because it's simple (I put any disk in the drive and it plays, i press buttons and stuff happens) and because large desktop PCs are rarer in households than you imagine now. Laptops are everywhere now. This is partly because microsoft don't seem to give a damn about games now, and wish they were a mac. I'm not very tech, but i've heard that windows 7 does almost nothing except improve how memory gets used for gamers. and that's bad or something. For me, mouse based FPS and all the community and modding you get with PCs will keep me coming for a while.
Except you need to go onto forums. I used to play COD4 MW A LOT. Like...daily. I never once went on any forums to get help. When I wanted to bitch, I went and emailed Infinity Ward. When I bitched at Valve, I emailed Valve (or Gabe Newell...) Not so true for mods. You make a good point....Consoles are less intrusive; hooks up to your TV (game from your couch...win - harder to do with a KB/Mouse) and consoles are small and contained. My gaming PC is fucking huge. As for MS and PC gaming...they are putting work into Live gaming on PC, as well as DX11. Win7 adds in DX11 and improves overall perf. It's not the OS' job to handle gaming; DX covers that in the end...making sure the OS performs well is generally enough for a general purpose OS. Don't get me wrong - I'm sure MS has a vested interest in PC gaming, given PC gaming lives in a Windows world...but when so many people prefer gaming from their couch, game developers are going to focus more on making console games than PC games. Someone from Crytek came out a few months ago and said something that I was surprised to hear Crytek say: PC gaming graphics wion't improve much between now and 2012; not because the hardware won't advance, but because games are made for the consoles, which are a stationary taret; They always have the same hardware, and so aside from optimizing code to eek a little more perf out and thus possibly improve the graphics a little, you won't see improvements. And when you develop a game for the console, are you REALLY going to turn around and then redesign the game on PC to have ground breaking graphics? (the answer is no - they'll port it to X86 and alter the controls and ship it...else the development costs would skyrocket.) I've said it before and I'll say it again: Console gaming brings gaming to the masses. PC gaming doesn't. PC gaming is becoming a niche market that will continuously dwindle. That sucks since my fav games of all time were PC games, but it's the way things have moved, and I think where they will continue to move.
