It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I think it's tough to say which side is converging faster. It would have to be console specific. XBox has several cross platform titles between PC and XB, and they even slated to have Mouse and Keyboard support across the board, with information releasing even in december about the impending updates.Phaserlight said:You spend four paragraphs explaining how consoles and PCs are different, and then state "I'm not sure where you're getting this B.S. from"?Darksworm said:Quote: "I disagree; I find that console and PC games tend to be quite different both in philosophy and implementation. A console is not a PC, and a gamepad is not a mouse and keyboard. I'm not saying one is better than the other. I prefer PC, however I'm only claiming that they are notably different."
Consoles are only different in philosophy and implementation in the sense that the primary control interface and general user interface (which doesn't matter once you're in the game) is different. Apart from that, a console is no different than a PC with a 10 foot interface hooked up to a television/monitor, and an Xbox or PS5 controller hooked up to it.
Consoles support Mouse and Keyboard. Desktop PCs support controllers. This is a useless thing to mention. It's up to the developer to implement proper support for these input methods on either platform. There are some PC games without Controller Support - so you're basically forced to map the controller manually using external software. That is not "support," that's just one benefit of an Open PC ecosystem - the fact that you can install device drivers for hardware and use 3rd party configuration software to map them in this way.
If the PS5 shipped with Razer Synapse or Logitech Gaming Software built into the OS, then this would be a wash, as people would simply buy that brand of peripherals and use the software to configure them. But, that would never happen because Microsoft and Sony would be looking for ways to create Microsoft or Sony peripherals and profit off of it.
The walled garden approach is what's holding consoles back. The gameplay cannot move forward at the pace that PC gaming did, because the platforms are restricted in this way.
But, consoles literally are mid-range gaming PCs. I'm not sure where you're getting this B.S. from.
Developing for console is, in terms of implementation, no different than developing for Mac or Linux. The same issues arise. If your graphics engine doesn't support those platforms and/or thier APIs, then you have a ton of work on your hands and are likely to either fail to deliver a decent product - or you won't port at all.
FFXIV's port to macOS is a great example of this. They designed it with the PS3 and PS4 in mind, so those ports were not hard for them. The macOS port, however, was and is a disaster. A lot of macOS ports of Windows Games uses Wine, in fact. GW2 used Wine for years, but I think they finally got a native client out.
Not interested in VR. It's just another gimmick to sell overpriced hardware. Also, nothing about MMORPGs these days suspends reality. MMORPGs were magical when the genre and tech was fairly new. EverQuest actually felt like a world to people, back then... But no one really feels that way, these days. It's just a game.
I don't think VR is going to change that. It will just be another new, shiny thing for people to play with. Every platform is trying to develop their own proprietary VR headset to reap the most profits off of it.
Try going back and reading what I wrote in its entirety; I agree with you. I'm not saying they will never be the same, but they are not literally the same thing right now. PC games tend to be different in design philosophy from console games, a point which you concede.
They are converging, but not as quickly as the mobile-PC space is.
I would argue that primary control interface and user interface do matter. Claiming that it doesn't matter once you are in the game very quickly falls apart under scrutiny: certain types of gameplay are just not feasible with a controller today. A mouse and keyboard really do make a difference. That stated, sometimes I do prefer a gamepad.
It really depends on the controller, and the game system in general. For example, the switch is a console, with controllers and a touchscreen like a tablet. In that case, there wouldn't be very many games you couldn't make work.Phaserlight said:I disagree; I find that console and PC games tend to be quite different both in philosophy and implementation. A console is not a PC, and a gamepad is not a mouse and keyboard. I'm not saying one is better than the other. I prefer PC, however I'm only claiming that they are notably different.
A game like RimWorld could not work on a console because you need to be able to rapidly and accurately manipulate the screen. Ironically enough, I could see it working on tablets for this reason, although I believe it is a PC-only title.
A shooter on PC is significantly different than a shooter on console. Prior to games like "Halo" and "Goldeneye 64", no one was really sure a shooter would even work on console. Even though these titles proved they did (and became the most popular genre on consoles, even), they are significantly different in design from games like Quake or Counterstrike.
I didn't find any issues with the leaf tickets, it seems you get quite a few just from playing the game. I'm pretty much with you on the activities. I miss digging for fossils, and I loved planting trees in the previous games. One of the coolest things they had in the older animal crossing games were the gyroids too. You would collect them, place them in your house, and then start them in different orders making crazy music that would play when people walked in.Ikeda said:Honestly, my MAIN issue with the game is not enough to collect. Animal Crossing is at heart a collection/checklist game. You want EVERY item, every fossil, fish, bug, etc. This has only a few. Some sites have criticized the leaf tickets. But the ONLY thing I NEEDED (ok, wanted) leaf tickets for was to finish my Tom Nook stool. I got KK for free, I almost got Tom for free. But I wanted it sooner so I paid 2 bucks. Otherwise I got all the X-mas stuff minus 3 items on day 1, Tree by day 2, and I'm almost at my fireplace on day (4?). I'll have everything within 2 wks at this rate with 2 wks to go..
Last I heard and appears to still be the case .. windows 10 is still the "end game" of OS's for windows and Microsoft. From this point forward they supposedly are looking at updates only. Kind of why there was a big backlash on it becoming a subscription service a few years back ,everyone thought windows 10 would push the subscriptions in at some point, and they probably will... usually around the 5 year mark, you may see a yearly or 5 year subscription or something like that.Your really talking about web page hits using those operating systems, in the case of android, your talking about smartphones etc. When it comes to PC's and OS marketshare, then Android is irrelevant. As for Win 10, it didn't achieve the milestones that MS had set for it (it still hasn't) initially it even struggled to compete with Win 8, even now, years after it was launched, it still has not managed to become the primary Windows OS, at this point its unlikely that will ever happen, i would be very surprised if MS isn't already working on a successor to Win 10, though i doubt they would risk calling it Win 11, but i would be very surprised if in the next 18 months there was news about something 'new' from MS, i doubt it will be free and it may well be a OS that needs a subscription to use, hell i'd bet money that they even call it something like Windows Prime.Equally so, that's why I said it depends on where you get your information. Netmarketshare shows the numbers you stated, W3schools and gs.statcounter show closer to my figures. Either way, its only a matter of time before Windows 10 reaches optimal saturation seeing as how it's slates as the "last release"Not sure where you are getting your figures from tbh, afaik the adoption of Win10 vs Win 7 is that the Win 10 OS is less than half that of the Win 7 install base.Thats part of the long game though. XB1 and upcoming windows platforms (namely the standalone devices) would utilize UWP. While right now it's not great, the idea is pretty sound. We may not see a strong return on that anytime soon, but in terms of paving the way forward for games and potentially applications as well in the future, it makes a lot of sense.If only UWP was any good, for gaming its not really much cop and objectively worse than games that don't use it, its probably one of the main reasons why Windows Store is not a good place to get games from. That Windows 10 is still not the main Windows OS doesn't help either, that the primary OS used by most Windows users is still Windows 7 is particularly damning, the only thing to date that Windows 10 has actually achieved, is that more people use it than use Windows 8, and is probably the main reason why if developers want to create games for the PC, then its usually Direct X 11 based, assuming its using Direct X at all that is, after all why would any developer create a game using only UWP if barely 1/4 of PC's could even run it? and of those a significant proportion are not even gaming devices.Not sure why this is "news" today, Microsoft mentioned they were going to do this at least a couple years back with the Windows 10 release. Part of the premise when they released details on the Xbox one S and the announcement of scorpio was that they weren't going to do generational consoles anymore and instead push the software so it's available across different devices.
It's been part of the long game for several years and the main reason why they pushed UWP.
Windows 10 makes up quite a big marketshare at the moment though. Depending on what you're looking at in terms of windows OS, we're closer to a 40/40 split on Windows 10/7 as opposed to a 30/50 split about a year ago, so there is a wider adoption. For Microsofts sake we can only hope they're able to pull their vision together for a truly universal platform.... we're still a ways away from that though.Unfortunately windows 10 is already fairly successful, although the adoption wasn't initially as strong as MS wanted which is why they are pushing more strongarm tactics trying to get everyone on the same release. I guess you can't really blame them, they've been fragmented for so long, it's the same issue Android is going through right now, despite it rivaling microsoft in OS marketshare (beating it in most cases) these kinds of growing pains make it hard to get a uniform release and one of the major reasons Samsung is trying to push towards TizenAsm0deus said:
As for the new split it's not adoption so much as they are forcing people to w10 with false information like w7 wont work on kaby/coffee lake which is not true.
I am not a hater but I really hope w10 fails hard or at least takes a long long time before it forces some of us to go from MS windows to something else.