Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Let's talk about which is better for gaming: PC's or Consoles?
#26
(01-07-2013, 05:19 PM)Omegajak Wrote: Here comes a new challenger!

Guys let me take a moment just to say: This is awesome, we love a thing so much that we are given the opportunity to talk about it. Remember discussion births new ideas new ways of thinking and that's never a bad thing, it never will be.

I think it's becoming more a argument of what's more practical as to what was the developers mind set? What did they want you to think and to feel. I think people are making good points that power in terms of hardware is important, but reality isn't so kind money is a factor a big one and we all have to face that. Gaming is NOT a cheap hobby by any standard.

I throw my hat that console games though dated in power and limiting are the foundation of what gaming is suppose to be. I recently heard on Game Grumps there's a feature or programming into Super Mario World camera that snaps to plat forms to make the game more seamless in transition as you progress through a level (haven't confirmed but cannot deny).


Not game grumps by any means, but it certainly elaborates on this feature very well.

The really cool thing I find with games and a reason why i think we need a re-birthing of sprites in the first place is because you are limited. SNES and SEGA cartridges are dated in terms of memory but look at all the memories these people created for this very limited version of Interactive story telling?! Limitations help us understand what we need to do to get the most out of our game. FF6 is heralded as the Zenith of 16 Era RPG gaming, but Chrono Trigger is the better looking more complicated game.

In the online series 'Extra Credits' they talk about the business side of gaming (it is a business you can't run from that fact) a lot of designers and coders always are looking to fine tune and tweak to some numbing levels. The point I'm trying to make is at the end of the day you HAVE to ship your game. It doesn't matter how powerful the machines you play your games on are, yes a powerful machine can do more but then the argument can be made that a designer needs XXXX time to make that game as wonderful and as impressive as we imagine it for our power PC and in this day and age how much time can you honestly give? The limitations of the console help define the parameters and power of the game if a designer doesn't use the resources well that's their fault not your for buying a console instead of a PC.

Some people were lucky enough to have powerful PC's and the best consoles of their time, some could only get what they could get and had to settle (I say that but it's not necessarily a bad thing if you ended up loving what you had). My vote is that PC is proving how much power we can put behind a game, consoles help define a gaming era and the masterful duty of a game designer who tried to do everything in thier power to make the game as good (or bad) as it was/is.

Wall of text.jpg

Actually, not going to lie. This post kind of got me thinking.

I also remember Egoraptor mentioning on game grumps that a good game doesn't need to be unnecessarily long but it shouldn't be unnecessarily short ether, so I guess my question to the gamers is what should the length of a single game really be and is the power of your PC or console really killing how potentially great that game could really be?

It's kind of a shift away from the console vs. PC discussion in one perspective but in another point of view it kind of relates to the discussion. I'm kind of going to be honest and admit that I don't like playing games that have a terribly long length (Sans assassin's creed or hell even red dead redemption was pretty long for a game now that I remember.) or have an infinite world to explore like minecraft. These days I've quickly gotten bored of those kind of games and I seem to keep on finding myself to not be able to replay those games, even if they are good.

So I guess now that the way I'm looking at it, perhaps the way limitations are expanding the more and more likely I see games just getting more boring. I mean, look at games like Super Mario World... Or A Link to the Past... I mean both of those had reasonable lengths of game play and to this day they'd probably be considered short. So maybe the key to having a really good game isn't really how long it is, it's a matter of how the game uses it's limitations to create an enjoyable experience.
Thanked by: Omegajak


Messages In This Thread
RE: Let's talk about which is better for gaming: PC's or Consoles? - by DioShiba - 01-07-2013, 05:48 PM
RE: Outdated Games That Deserve Remakes? - by Koh - 01-06-2013, 11:39 AM
RE: Outdated Games That Deserve Remakes? - by Koh - 01-06-2013, 06:40 PM

Forum Jump: