Microsoft: Hardly anyone plays first-person shooters on the PC

Coming after his prediction last week that Kinect will "blow away" iPad sales, Microsoft's Kudo Tsunoda expressed his opinion on the current state of PC gaming. Speaking in an interview with Game Informer, the Kinect spokesman stated that "hardly anyone" plays first-person shooters on the PC today, with console-only titles such as Halo: Reach.

"Halo did an awesome job of building a first-person shooter exclusively for the console, and now hardly anyone plays first-person shooters on the PC anymore," says Tsunoda, when asked what he thought of Kinect implementation into future games. "If you think about the way that first-person shooters evolved, they started on the PC. People for the longest time tried to port shooters from the PC onto the console."

Kudo continued to compare Kinect to the introduction of first-person shooters to the original consoles. "And people said the same things that they are saying now about Kinect – 'It's never going to be responsive enough to do this,' or 'You're never going to get a fun first person shooter on the console' – it's only made for a keyboard and mouse and that is the way it is supposed to be played.'

"And as long as everyone was just porting the existing shooters over to console, they weren't as fun as the PC ones. Of course, they were built for the PC." Kinect for the Xbox 360 is set to hit stores shelves on November 4 in North America and November 10 in Europe. The device carries a $149.99/£149.99 price tag.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft: over 2 million IE9 beta downloads

Next Story

Zune expanding its entertainment services to international markets

242 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

nVidia 6800UT: 16 shader pipelines at 1100MHz = 17.6G shader operations per second
X360: 48 pipes x 500MHz = 24.0G sop/s
nVidia GeForce GT 240: 96 pipes x 1340Mhz = 128.6G sop/s
nVidia GeForce GTX 480: 480 pipes x 1401MHz = 672.3G sop/s

GTX 480 is ~28 times more powerful than X360 or PS3! Overall speed difference would be even bigger if you throw new range of Intel CPUs into equation. PS3 and 360 have GPU equivalent to old nVidia 6800. PC with nVidia GeForce 240 is 5 times more powerful than PS3/360. This is the reason why serious gamers prefer PC (Full HD resolution, maximum quality, physics, etc...). Today you can buy crappy PC with same power as console for £300 and it will reproduce "console" quality (1280x720p, anti-aliasing: off, many effects: off) without any problems.

It seems as though a lot of members here believe that the PC platform is vastly superior to consoles for first-person shooters. At one point, I may have agreed with most of you; however, that changed when I decided to play console first-person shooters again. As a longtime PC gamer, it took awhile to get used to using a controller. It felt cumbersome, awkward, and annoying to use.

In time, I became good at using a controller to aim and move around. Auto-aim made things easier, which is understandable, considering the fact that joysticks offer less precision than mice. Nevertheless, it didn't make consoles that much inferior. I guess what I'm trying to say is that what you lose in precision, you gain in comfortability.

If you're a strict PC-only gamer, try gaming on a console for a change. It might just change the way you think of first-person shooters like Halo and Call of Duty.

i won't be surprise anyone wrote this type of comment. but,a lot of people maybe prefer kinect style of FPS game than using a controller because it proba work the way they want as the speed of mouse and that doesn't mean xbox 360 controller suck it just place in the wrong category. The only thing is will those game get support for kinect such as call of duty and other fps game

zakyr said,

+10000


Is that all you do? Or is it because you can't accept the fact that comparing the two is idiotic and looking down on console gamers because they aren't playing the same way you are is simply retarded?

LiquidSolstice said,

Is that all you do? Or is it because you can't accept the fact that comparing the two is idiotic and looking down on console gamers because they aren't playing the same way you are is simply retarded?

You mean how youve spent this entire article proclaiming the righteousness of console games and how they are 100% better than PC games(despite better graphics, cheaper cost, better performance), the console crowd is 100% more mature than the PC gamers(despite 13 year old kids screaming profanities on xbox live in every single game you go into), and you are completely unbiased towards consoles(despite everything you have every posted).

LiquidSolstice said,

Is that all you do? Or is it because you can't accept the fact that comparing the two is idiotic and looking down on console gamers because they aren't playing the same way you are is simply retarded?

Hypocrite much? Seriously, in the entire article you've done nothing but denounce PC gamers and you tell me its retarded? Better have a look at your own comments first, mate.

notta said,
What was this guy smoking?

Skittles most likely, It's stupid though like dose this guy even know about Valve,Steam,CS?

Snapdragon said,
The PC still remains the best platform for FPS, RPG, MMO and RTS games in my opinion.

How is it better for an RPG? An RTS, yes, I can understand a mouse makes things a hell of a lot easier, but broadly classifying RPGs as better on a PC is kind of dumb. We've had hugely successful RPGs on everything from consoles to GameBoys.

LiquidSolstice said,

How is it better for an RPG? An RTS, yes, I can understand a mouse makes things a hell of a lot easier, but broadly classifying RPGs as better on a PC is kind of dumb. We've had hugely successful RPGs on everything from consoles to GameBoys.
For most knowledgeable gamers, it's obvious that the PC is the superior platform for FPS, RTS, and MMO games. However, it's arguable that RPGs are on a level playing field on consoles and the PC. Personally, I think RPGs are slightly better on the PC because of the number of keys you could potentially use (on a keyboard). With a controller, you're limited by the number of buttons. Aside from that, the graphics can look better on a well-equipped PC vs. a console.

Anaron said,
For most knowledgeable gamers, it's obvious that the PC is the superior platform for FPS, RTS, and MMO games. However, it's arguable that RPGs are on a level playing field on consoles and the PC. Personally, I think RPGs are slightly better on the PC because of the number of keys you could potentially use (on a keyboard). With a controller, you're limited by the number of buttons. Aside from that, the graphics can look better on a well-equipped PC vs. a console.

Let's do a simple comparison. Dragon Age on PC vs Dragon Age on Console... which would you rather play? Inventory interaction is much better with a mouse than it is with a controller, not to mention controlling your character in the first place. Now, I understand that there are a ton of RPGs that are meant for console gaming... i.e. the classic japanese-style RPGs like the Final Fantasy series where your interaction with the game itself isn't as free as it would be on a different style (Dragon Age, Diablo, NWN, Baldur's Gate, etc) RPG meant for the PC. As such one could easily argue that PCs are better for RPGs as you can play the console-aimed RPGs on a PC with the same ease you could play them on a console, but not vice-versa.

What a lie! How about all those BIG lanparties around the world where people play Counter-Strike and Call of Duty (FPS games) on PCs...

There are people who like the console and those who like the PC. I can see why the console numbers increase over PC. The console is cheaper and easier for a parent to buy there kids or for adults. People who play on consoles are good at the controls and people who play on PCs are good at the controls. I don't think the PC gaming market is dieing. It is just being out paced by consoles. If a game producer stops making games for PCs it means that they are loosing that market share. Some one will fill that void because there is a market. With the economy down it is more economical for the game producers to target consoles more that PCs. Halos sucked anyway so of course no one will play Halo on the PC. If Microsoft would make a great FPS for the PC then maybe they would make some money.

sviola said,
For those saying that using a controller to play FPS is better, read this:

http://www.rahulsood.com/2010/...-get-killed-against-pc.html

your logic has no place here.... lol.
i experienced this with halo. played halo 3 a while back against a friend who plays atleast a few hours in the week on his xbox360. i learned to play FPS's on counterstrike and unreal tourny GOTY. didnt take long to catch up to his skill level due to how slow console fps's are compared to the PC fps. the fact that it takes 2 seconds to kill someone in that game for an experienced console gamer made me sad. im use to walking around the corner and after .5 seconds im dead if i didnt kill the other guy already. even modern warfare 2 which is much faster than halo 3 takes a full second for a good player if they arent expecting it. rts, mmorpg and fps on pc. regular rpg and sports on console imo.

ILikeTobacco said,

your logic has no place here.... lol.
i experienced this with halo. played halo 3 a while back against a friend who plays atleast a few hours in the week on his xbox360. i learned to play FPS's on counterstrike and unreal tourny GOTY. didnt take long to catch up to his skill level due to how slow console fps's are compared to the PC fps. the fact that it takes 2 seconds to kill someone in that game for an experienced console gamer made me sad. im use to walking around the corner and after .5 seconds im dead if i didnt kill the other guy already. even modern warfare 2 which is much faster than halo 3 takes a full second for a good player if they arent expecting it. rts, mmorpg and fps on pc. regular rpg and sports on console imo.

In the blog, PC Gamers using a PC were put against Xbox Gamers playing with a controller, not PC Gamers with a controller playing on Xbox. The game was to be released for PC and Xbox and would put players on both plataforms against it other, each on his plataform of preference.

sviola said,

In the blog, PC Gamers using a PC were put against Xbox Gamers playing with a controller, not PC Gamers with a controller playing on Xbox. The game was to be released for PC and Xbox and would put players on both plataforms against it other, each on his plataform of preference.

Yea I know. Was just putting in my two sense. The console games are annoyingly slow IMO. (due to the controller issues) When I played the console version, the slower game play gave me ample time to think about what I'm doing vs the split second decisions required for the PC version. Makes console games so much less intense. I play on both though due to having friends that are not PC gamers. I bought MW2 on console to play with them but since most are not going to get BO, not going to bother with it on console.

sviola said,

In the blog, PC Gamers using a PC were put against Xbox Gamers playing with a controller, not PC Gamers with a controller playing on Xbox. The game was to be released for PC and Xbox and would put players on both plataforms against it other, each on his plataform of preference.

Like I said, the blog post was nothing but biased garbage from a PC gamer who spent most of it knocking console gamers and proclaiming the "true gaming" of PCs. Obviously console gamers won't compete with PC gamers, because it's PC gamers vs PC gamers and console gamers vs console gamers that brings out the skill in all players; you learn your skills because you're playing with other people who are using the same control setup as you.

A lot of people are talking about playing FPSes using a controller vs. a keyboard and mouse. Between the two, I'd say the keyboard/mouse combo is more accurate, because intuitively it just seems easier to aim using broad strokes of the whole arm than just the thumb.
But personally, I think a controller like the Wiimote (or maybe even Move?) is really the best setup for FPSes. I mean, what's more intuitive for a shooting game than holding something in your hand, pointing it at a target on the screen, and squeezing the trigger to fire?

potaro said,
A lot of people are talking about playing FPSes using a controller vs. a keyboard and mouse. Between the two, I'd say the keyboard/mouse combo is more accurate, because intuitively it just seems easier to aim using broad strokes of the whole arm than just the thumb.
But personally, I think a controller like the Wiimote (or maybe even Move?) is really the best setup for FPSes. I mean, what's more intuitive for a shooting game than holding something in your hand, pointing it at a target on the screen, and squeezing the trigger to fire?

+1 but of course with that you lose the ability to walk around as precisely as you can with a keyboard.

Wow, this guy couldn't be farther from the truth. I can understand trying to promote the kinect, but to say no one plays FPS on PC anymore... uh.... B.S.

dotf said,

266,505 players on pc.
Millions on consoles.

Statistics tell me that's almost no one.

266,505 x $40 = $10,660,200
common sense tells me that's a good chunk of change

dotf said,

266,505 players on pc.
Millions on consoles.

Statistics tell me that's almost no one.

Again, your all thinking "online" only.. He never stated online based FPS genre... he said FPS as a genre.. Online and Offline.. Those are online only statistics so please stop being narrow minded..

Examinus said,
I can't sit on my couch with a keyboard and mouse.

you should look into a wireless keyboard and mouse then. its the latest and greatest in the pc world.

actually i do have a pc connected to my tv along with a console.

IDK. When I go into walmart anymore there is only 1 or 2 shelves dedicated to pc gaming. and a 1/4 of those are for casual gamers. The rest is all consoles. pc gaming is dying.

speedstr3789 said,
IDK. When I go into walmart anymore there is only 1 or 2 shelves dedicated to pc gaming. and a 1/4 of those are for casual gamers. The rest is all consoles. pc gaming is dying.

That doesn't mean PC gaming is dying. It means people are buying more games via download than in stores: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6276553.html

When I come home from work, I know i'd rather sit on my sofa and play a FPS to let of some steam. The last thing I want to do is sit behind another desk!

PC gamers usually have a bit higher expectations. Console gamers can (obviously) pay $50+ for a game with either only single player, or where they only play the single player part (yes I know several who never plays online).

PC gamers don't pay that much for an experience that only lasts a couple of hours, there has to be something more--multi player! Valve realized this way back and they have great multi player games out there--and you need a legit copy to be able to play.

Playing FPS on a console is as good as taking a dump when you're out of tissue paper--it works, but heck, it's not the best experience.

I can only assume that this person has never owned a PC that can play a FPS (even Doom...), as stated many times the worlds #1 FPS (in my view, and pleanty others) is still growing and generating sales (CS & CSS).

Also has he never heard of Steam? - Valve with their overwhelming steam store keeping gamers around the world up on FPS games.

Who gives a cr*p that Halo: Reach is only avil on the xbox platform - Agreed the Halo series is a great seller but only on the xbox platform (they tried PC but killed it off due to piracy), but comparing a game that apparently will kill off all other competition on other platforms that are unable to run/install the game is just stupid.

The trouble with this article... is that based on available data, he's right.

Most of my Mates play PC Games, FPS included. All of them use steam.

Steam doesn't release individual sales or play statistics.

And there is the kicker. All the people *Still* playing CS:S simply don't register in industry data for the PC. Whereas MS can see exactly how many people are playing Halo at any one time. Games like L4D, Borderlands & TF2... are unknowns to anyone outside valve. We as players know there's plenty of people there; but there's no data to back it up.

I can't use FPS on a console, I just cant get used to the joypads or even the mouse/nunchuck combo's.
they just feel too laggy on a console.

I use My PC for FPS and MMo's and sports on my PS3

I've been playing FPSs on my PC all my life, in fact 95% of the games I play and own are FPS. Try play against ESL level PC players on a console...

He is an idiot!
He is only making comments like that to justify the hardware that he is touting.
Strange that the new hardware is coming out in November!!
How can we get the public to move from PC to our console and buy our new hardware?? I know I will make a comment that will make the buying public think that PC gaming is on its way out and the only way forward is consoles, plus our new hardware add ons.
Well the buying public are not stupid.
As I said, yes he is an idiot.

jporter said,
What an IDIOT. PC is THE way to play 1st person, because it has a mouse. Oh and it looks way better anyway.

Have you ever used a controller? It feels far more natural.

LiquidSolstice said,

Have you ever used a controller? It feels far more natural.

Have you ever used a Mouse-KB? It feels almost natural and gives you better control.

LiquidSolstice said,

Have you ever used a controller? It feels far more natural.

I started out as a console gamer and ended up as a PC/console gamer. In my opinion, it feels more natural to point and shoot with a mouse than a controller. It's simpler, really. With a controller, you lack precision which is why developers add auto-aim to most first-person shooters on consoles. Controllers, however, are more comfortable to use for prolonged periods of time.

LiquidSolstice said,

Wow, a biased article written by a pc gamer talking about a failed experiment that was never going to work. Can I race a Hummer against a Le Mans car and win? Does that mean the Hummer is not a real car?

No one is arguing that a console is not a good gaming plataform. But you said that the controller feels more natural than playing with a k/m. And that is not true for FPS (maybe for racing or flight games using wheels and joysticks).

I don't care about the article, i think the picture is just class. Love it. Also, I don't believe the PC Gaming market is going anywhere..

I fear that PC gaming is a dying breed. I go into more and more shops and the PC section is only about 10% of the shop.

I love playing with mouse and keyboard. And the graphics are a hell of a lot better on PC.

But I think I would move to console permenetly if the graphics matched up to PC.

dave164 said,
I fear that PC gaming is a dying breed. I go into more and more shops and the PC section is only about 10% of the shop.

I love playing with mouse and keyboard. And the graphics are a hell of a lot better on PC.

But I think I would move to console permenetly if the graphics matched up to PC.

store.steampowered.com I play lots of PC games, and I have not bought a single one from a store in over 2 years. A few I have bought off of Amazon for a great deal, but Steam is where its at. Digital sales have pushed past store sales these days.

dave164 said,
I fear that PC gaming is a dying breed. I go into more and more shops and the PC section is only about 10% of the shop.

I love playing with mouse and keyboard. And the graphics are a hell of a lot better on PC.

But I think I would move to console permenetly if the graphics matched up to PC.

When I can play a strategy game on my PS3 with a mouse and keyboard, I'll agree with you. There are plenty of titles I could have bought cheaper for PS3 than I did for the PC, but I still got them for the PC, as I simply don't see how I can play say... Dragon Age on my PS3 without a ton of issues related to controls.

Metodi Mitov said,

When I can play a strategy game on my PS3 with a mouse and keyboard, I'll agree with you. There are plenty of titles I could have bought cheaper for PS3 than I did for the PC, but I still got them for the PC, as I simply don't see how I can play say... Dragon Age on my PS3 without a ton of issues related to controls.

I don't know where you're from but in North America, PC games are generally cheaper than their console counterparts.

Anaron said,
I don't know where you're from but in North America, PC games are generally cheaper than their console counterparts.

Depends on where you do your shopping. I can usually find console games at a lower price than PC games, with just a bit (Say 10-15 minutes) of searching. And yes, I'm talking about North America.

He's partly right. Halo is a great first-person shooter for the Xbox 360. However, his mistake was assuming that few people play first-person shooters on the PC. It would have been correct to say that less people play first-person shooters on the PC than consoles.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not implying that few people play those games on the PC. In fact, a lot still do. Take a look at the stats for Steam (scroll down): http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Now add the millions of players that don't use Steam for games like World of Warcraft, StarCraft/StarCraft 2, etc. Make no mistake, the PC gaming business is still alive and kicking. She may not be as good as she was back in the day but she still gets the job done.

Anaron said,
He's partly right. Halo is a great first-person shooter for the Xbox 360. However, his mistake was assuming that few people play first-person shooters on the PC. It would have been correct to say that less people play first-person shooters on the PC than consoles.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm not implying that few people play those games on the PC. In fact, a lot still do. Take a look at the stats for Steam (scroll down): http://store.steampowered.com/stats/

Now add the millions of players that don't use Steam for games like World of Warcraft, StarCraft/StarCraft 2, etc. Make no mistake, the PC gaming business is still alive and kicking. She may not be as good as she was back in the day but she still gets the job done.

The focus was on PC FPS vs Console FPS gaming, not PC gaming vs Console gaming. I don't see how WoW and StarCraft 1/2 come into play into the statistics. Sure, I disagree with the fellow that PC FPS gaming is dying in comparison to Console FPS gaming, but I have to disagree with your post too.

Metodi Mitov said,

The focus was on PC FPS vs Console FPS gaming, not PC gaming vs Console gaming. I don't see how WoW and StarCraft 1/2 come into play into the statistics. Sure, I disagree with the fellow that PC FPS gaming is dying in comparison to Console FPS gaming, but I have to disagree with your post too.

The last paragraph of my comment was directed to those that thought PC gaming, in general, was dying. The first two paragraphs addressed the subject of this article. Perhaps you decided not to read that part and assumed that the last paragraph represented the point I tried to get across. If that was the case, then kindly re-read my comment. Thanks.

/that guy is clear idiot. Call of Duty 5, half life, play 4 dead, etc. My god and many more. PC Game is getting better and better everyday. It is console that ruin development for PC Game

satus said,
/that guy is clear idiot. Call of Duty 5, half life, play 4 dead, etc. My god and many more. PC Game is getting better and better everyday. It is console that ruin development for PC Game

Really? And how is that?

LiquidSolstice said,

Really? And how is that?

The new games that I have played have obviously been created for the console and then ported to PC. They just aren't the quality they use to be.

dave164 said,

The new games that I have played have obviously been created for the console and then ported to PC. They just aren't the quality they use to be.

Could it be because.....GASP.....consoles are getting more and more popular?

Without PC games there will be no Microsoft Windows. People will switch faster to Mac or other platforms. Slowly in time developers will start writing codes and applications for other platforms. One reason that 360 was primary choice for developer to develop games for it was Microsoft SDK and similarity of it to PC. So Microsoft needs PC games because even now their success on Xbox 360 was for PC. Microsoft echo system (Windows platform, DirectX, XBOX 360) is dependent on each other and without PC games in next 5 years Windows Empire will collapse.

aydinj said,
rhetoric.

Perhaps if that's all PCs were used for. The windows empire will continue, and since it's branching into the cloud, even the *nix fans will be inundated with powered by Azure, or IIS or something to make them cringe.

aydinj said,
Without PC games there will be no Microsoft Windows. People will switch faster to Mac or other platforms. Slowly in time developers will start writing codes and applications for other platforms. One reason that 360 was primary choice for developer to develop games for it was Microsoft SDK and similarity of it to PC. So Microsoft needs PC games because even now their success on Xbox 360 was for PC. Microsoft echo system (Windows platform, DirectX, XBOX 360) is dependent on each other and without PC games in next 5 years Windows Empire will collapse.

Are you mental? You think PCs were invented for gaming? Have you left your bedroom and taken a look outside of the real world recently?

aydinj said,
Without PC games there will be no Microsoft Windows. People will switch faster to Mac or other platforms. Slowly in time developers will start writing codes and applications for other platforms. One reason that 360 was primary choice for developer to develop games for it was Microsoft SDK and similarity of it to PC. So Microsoft needs PC games because even now their success on Xbox 360 was for PC. Microsoft echo system (Windows platform, DirectX, XBOX 360) is dependent on each other and without PC games in next 5 years Windows Empire will collapse.

+1000

LiquidSolstice said,

Are you mental? You think PCs were invented for gaming? Have you left your bedroom and taken a look outside of the real world recently?

You really need to improve your reading skills...this is the second time in this article you misunderstand a post.

sviola said,

You really need to improve your reading skills...this is the second time in this article you misunderstand a post.

"Without PC games there will be no Microsoft Windows." Where is there truth in that statement, oh all-knowing-wise-one?

LiquidSolstice said,

"Without PC games there will be no Microsoft Windows." Where is there truth in that statement, oh all-knowing-wise-one?

He never said that PC were invented for gaming. And it is probable that if there are no PC games, there is little reason to use a PC (specially with the focus moving from desktop to the Web). A Linux or Mac would have the same capabilities as Windows, without the games (it's the only thing you can do better on Windows than the others).

dotf said,

They're not unproven. The numbers are available.

Yes, they are. And they say otherwise. People (of course) play lots of FPS on PC.

Dead'Soul said,
just played Crysis, one of the best games.. ON THE PC!

idiot, i will not buy kinect then!

Then please, don't. Means more of a chance the rest of us can get one on launch day.

Just because they announced Halo Reach sold for millions, doesn't mean the world is only playing Halo. Big LOL to this guy.. really. According to him, the world is only in his office and people around him.

"And as long as everyone was just porting the existing shooters over to console, they weren't as fun as the PC ones. Of course, they were built for the PC."

And yet he has no problems returning the favor. What a douche.

Well the one truth is that there are not that many who play outside of the handful of popular games.

Counterstrike
COD series
Battlefield series

Not a whole lot of people play other FPS than those games.

babyHacker said,
Well the one truth is that there are not that many who play outside of the handful of popular games.

Counterstrike
COD series
Battlefield series

Not a whole lot of people play other FPS than those games.

Your looking at online only games... While you need to take a step back and look at any kind of FPS games: Bio Shock 1 &2, Mass Effect 1 & 2 ( I know its not a true FPS but the same principle applies to it), Half Life 2, Team Fortress 2, Singularity, Crysis, ArmA II, Americas Army, BorderLands, Doom 3, FEAR series, STALKER, Red Faction series, Just Cause Series, FarCry, QUAKE Series, Unreal Tournament Series, Majority of the Rainbow Six series, Medal of Honor Series, L4D Series, Duke Nukem , Dues Ex 1 - 3 and those are just some of the PC FPS games I can think off that are either online or offline that made a big impact on PC gaming.. What does console truly have that has stuck.. Halo?? "laughs"

Morphine-X said,

Your looking at online only games... While you need to take a step back and look at any kind of FPS games: Bio Shock 1 &2, Mass Effect 1 & 2 ( I know its not a true FPS but the same principle applies to it), Half Life 2, Team Fortress 2, Singularity, Crysis, ArmA II, Americas Army, BorderLands, Doom 3, FEAR series, STALKER, Red Faction series, Just Cause Series, FarCry, QUAKE Series, Unreal Tournament Series, Majority of the Rainbow Six series, Medal of Honor Series, L4D Series, Duke Nukem , Dues Ex 1 - 3 and those are just some of the PC FPS games I can think off that are either online or offline that made a big impact on PC gaming.. What does console truly have that has stuck.. Halo?? "laughs"

You think Just Cause in FPS? Really? Just in case you didn't know, a lot of those games came for the console first and almost all of them are available for the consoles as well.

Morphine-X said,

Your looking at online only games... While you need to take a step back and look at any kind of FPS games: Bio Shock 1 &2, Mass Effect 1 & 2 ( I know its not a true FPS but the same principle applies to it), Half Life 2, Team Fortress 2, Singularity, Crysis, ArmA II, Americas Army, BorderLands, Doom 3, FEAR series, STALKER, Red Faction series, Just Cause Series, FarCry, QUAKE Series, Unreal Tournament Series, Majority of the Rainbow Six series, Medal of Honor Series, L4D Series, Duke Nukem , Dues Ex 1 - 3 and those are just some of the PC FPS games I can think off that are either online or offline that made a big impact on PC gaming.. What does console truly have that has stuck.. Halo?? "laughs"

Ehm... last I checked, Mass Effect 2 was a lot more focused on FPS than RPG. Just compare it to the first and see what I mean.

Metodi Mitov said,

Ehm... last I checked, Mass Effect 2 was a lot more focused on FPS than RPG. Just compare it to the first and see what I mean.

I've played them both and the second one has less based skills and the powers are session activated per target.

LiquidSolstice said,

You think Just Cause in FPS? Really? Just in case you didn't know, a lot of those games came for the console first and almost all of them are available for the consoles as well.

Uhm you might want to recheck that. I don't remember the Quake Series, L4D Series, Unreal Tournaments, TF2, Doom 3, and to be honest 90% of the ones I did write were first on the PC and only on the PC...

Morphine-X said,
Uhm you might want to recheck that. I don't remember the Quake Series, L4D Series, Unreal Tournaments, TF2, Doom 3, and to be honest 90% of the ones I did write were first on the PC and only on the PC...

Quake IV came out for the 360, both L4Ds have come out for the 360, Unreal has come out for the original xbox and for the PS3, and Doom 3 was on the original Xbox a long, long time ago. Not having a console kind of skews your memory a bit, doesn't it? Don't believe me? Look those titles up, you'll find them.

This isn't really something people can choose to agree or disagree with. It's the sort of thing that can be quantified. The numbers are out there, and if he's actually gotten his hands on the facts, the reality might be that PCs are not the platform of choice for FPS games anymore.

Remember, just because you play something, just because a lot of people are logged on playing something, doesn't mean it's taking up a significant chunk of market share.

People love to point at statements that make them feel sad and dark inside and say it's a load of crap. Okay, fine, so pull up the numbers that prove it. This doesn't have to be speculation, and it doesn't have to be anecdotal. When the facts are out there, covering your ears and shouting LALALA instead of looking into them to see whether or not their on your side is childish and stupid.

/personally wouldn't mind if the FPS genre up and disappeared altogether
//oh look, another military ops game
///oh look, another military ops game
////oh look, another military ops game

Consider the source, folks.

Microsoft, by and large, is a console-focussed game developer, and has been for years. (The last two FPS titles they published for PC were console ports - Halo and the original Gears of War - and neither was recent in the least.) They have as little clue of the current state of PC gaming as Sony or Nintendo, because they have had no real presence there. While it is certainly possible to connect a keyboard and mouse to the XB360 (they wouldn't even need to invent new hardware; they could simply supply drivers for existing devices, as the console has USB ports already), they have a vested interest in keeping the two markets (console and PC) as far apart as possible. (Yes; the same applies to Sony and Nintendo.)

Also, while both XB360 and PS3 are capable of 1920x1080 NI gaming, can anyone name an FPS that has support for it on either one? (In fact, I'll widen the net; name one game, regardless of genre, on either PS3 or XB360, that supports 1920x1080 NI out of the box.)

On the PC, on the other hand, such games abound, and in every genre, and at every price-point (including no price at all). As far as sheer graphical goodness, compare GOW on XB360 (the original target platform) with GOWPC. (I selected GOW for obvious reasons.)

Basically, the bias shown in the quoted post was expected, and therefore discounted as tunnel-vision-driven puffery.

PGHammer said,
Consider the source, folks.

Microsoft, by and large, is a console-focussed game developer, and has been for years. (The last two FPS titles they published for PC were console ports - Halo and the original Gears of War - and neither was recent in the least.) They have as little clue of the current state of PC gaming as Sony or Nintendo, because they have had no real presence there. While it is certainly possible to connect a keyboard and mouse to the XB360 (they wouldn't even need to invent new hardware; they could simply supply drivers for existing devices, as the console has USB ports already), they have a vested interest in keeping the two markets (console and PC) as far apart as possible. (Yes; the same applies to Sony and Nintendo.)

Also, while both XB360 and PS3 are capable of 1920x1080 NI gaming, can anyone name an FPS that has support for it on either one? (In fact, I'll widen the net; name one game, regardless of genre, on either PS3 or XB360, that supports 1920x1080 NI out of the box.)

On the PC, on the other hand, such games abound, and in every genre, and at every price-point (including no price at all). As far as sheer graphical goodness, compare GOW on XB360 (the original target platform) with GOWPC. (I selected GOW for obvious reasons.)

Basically, the bias shown in the quoted post was expected, and therefore discounted as tunnel-vision-driven puffery.

Sony and Nintendo have major interests in PC gaming? Since....when?

LiquidSolstice said,

Sony and Nintendo have major interests in PC gaming? Since....when?

That is precisely my point, LS....they don't. (Only Sony publishes *any* PC games today, and that's a sideline.)

At a time when apple is working on improving gaming on Macs, MS has been playing stupid by ignoring GFW. Margins may be greater with games for XBOX than with games for windows. But gaming was a major factor in popularity of PCs and MS will lose this edge if it gets too greedy..

mr.r9 said,
I think this guy is living in his own universe...or Microsoft pays him a lot just to talk ****.

Both, at the level where he is, i.e. being able to speak on behalf of the company he will be pulling in serious money and that he is also living in his own universe. You work on any project long enough and it becomes your only universe.

What he's trying to say is actually right. Think about video gamers today vs before Halo 1: how many are playing on their PCs still and how many are playing on their plasma from the couch (xbox/ps/etc.)

He's suggesting that Kinnect could have the same imfluence on shifting how we play games. He may be accused of being overly ambitious, but he's not wrong here.

Nice attempt at selling Kinect... But if you actully listened to your customers you'd know that all we want is the ability to use a keyboard and mouse on the couch!
Focus on making this functional and ergonomic and PC Gamers will make the switch to console... Console is a cheaper platform to maintain (as a gamer) and the games tend to have less bugs (or better support) due to the common hardware. Don't think for a second I wouldn't gladly accept these features if only I could retain the controller of choice for FPS!!!
Mouse and WASD are clearly superior in this respect. Halo and Gears of War are not true first person shooters - They are the typical console answer to a FPS, incorporating auto-aim and 'cover/fire' to compensate for the inaccuracy of the controller (or the retrdeness of everyone's thumbs).

jking_84 said,
Nice attempt at selling Kinect... But if you actully listened to your customers you'd know that all we want is the ability to use a keyboard and mouse on the couch!
Focus on making this functional and ergonomic and PC Gamers will make the switch to console... Console is a cheaper platform to maintain (as a gamer) and the games tend to have less bugs (or better support) due to the common hardware. Don't think for a second I wouldn't gladly accept these features if only I could retain the controller of choice for FPS!!!
Mouse and WASD are clearly superior in this respect. Halo and Gears of War are not true first person shooters - They are the typical console answer to a FPS, incorporating auto-aim and 'cover/fire' to compensate for the inaccuracy of the controller (or the retrdeness of everyone's thumbs).
How in the world is it cheaper?? $500-$700 on a single console system... $60 for an extra controler, $60 for each game you buy, xbox live subscription... vs $600 PC with a quad core 3ghz, 4gigs of ram, GTS 250 1 Gig OCed, $50 for games, no subscriptions, and small maintenance over the years as upgrades... I can also play the game I bought 5 years ago on any newer PC.. Can you play old xbox games you bought years ago on the 360? No and in 5 years you will have to buy a new console, new controllers, new games which will be even more expensive. I'm sure the average console user has twice as much invested in his console than on the PC end.. If you happen to have spent more on a PC I'm sure you would rather have a PC than a console anyways.

Morphine-X said,
How in the world is it cheaper?? $500-$700 on a single console system... $60 for an extra controler, $60 for each game you buy, xbox live subscription... vs $600 PC with a quad core 3ghz, 4gigs of ram, GTS 250 1 Gig OCed, $50 for games, no subscriptions, and small maintenance over the years as upgrades... I can also play the game I bought 5 years ago on any newer PC.. Can you play old xbox games you bought years ago on the 360? No and in 5 years you will have to buy a new console, new controllers, new games which will be even more expensive. I'm sure the average console user has twice as much invested in his console than on the PC end.. If you happen to have spent more on a PC I'm sure you would rather have a PC than a console anyways.

...WHAT??? $500 for a console? I paid $300 for my 360, it came with a sizable hard drive, an extra controller, Halo 3 ODST, Forza 3, and a wireless headset. Oh, and yeah, I paid $50 for live. That's it. Want to show me a $350 PC that can do that? And no, the 360 can play plenty of original xbox games. You're mental and out of touch with reality of if you think gaming consoles cost $500 to $700. And no, I haven't spent nearly as much on my console gaming as many of the PC gamers out there do. That's the problem with you PC gamers. You're all so quick to decide that console gamers are beneath you that you'll make up whatever you need to in order to make it seem like PC gaming is king.

jking_84 said,
Nice attempt at selling Kinect... But if you actully listened to your customers you'd know that all we want is the ability to use a keyboard and mouse on the couch!
Focus on making this functional and ergonomic and PC Gamers will make the switch to console... Console is a cheaper platform to maintain (as a gamer) and the games tend to have less bugs (or better support) due to the common hardware. Don't think for a second I wouldn't gladly accept these features if only I could retain the controller of choice for FPS!!!
Mouse and WASD are clearly superior in this respect. Halo and Gears of War are not true first person shooters - They are the typical console answer to a FPS, incorporating auto-aim and 'cover/fire' to compensate for the inaccuracy of the controller (or the retrdeness of everyone's thumbs).

Yeah, you're right, Gears of War is NOT an FPS at all, it's a third person shooter. Are you blind?

LiquidSolstice said,

...WHAT??? $500 for a console? I paid $300 for my 360, it came with a sizable hard drive, an extra controller, Halo 3 ODST, Forza 3, and a wireless headset. Oh, and yeah, I paid $50 for live. That's it. Want to show me a $350 PC that can do that? And no, the 360 can play plenty of original xbox games. You're mental and out of touch with reality of if you think gaming consoles cost $500 to $700. And no, I haven't spent nearly as much on my console gaming as many of the PC gamers out there do. That's the problem with you PC gamers. You're all so quick to decide that console gamers are beneath you that you'll make up whatever you need to in order to make it seem like PC gaming is king.

so you admit you dont even buy them when they first come out. so while you are waiting for the prices to drop on your console, the pc games spent $150 to upgrade their video card and play the same games with better video quality. i own a quad core pc with 8g of ram and two GeForce GTX 480 sli. When the next consoles come out, you will be stuck buying a 500+ console and i can go buy two video cards for $150 and play any game that comes out on that console. Console is clearly cheaper... It is completely illogical to assume someone buys a brand new pc everytime. If they are a true pc gamer, they know how to take care of their system and upgrade it. its basic math. 300 for upgrades is less than 500 for a console that just came out. you make it more than obvious that you think you are some elite console gamer that puts pc gamers to shame with your pure godliness which points to you buying the latest console when it comes out. its either that or you live at home and have to wait for when mommy is willing to dish out to pay for your console.

jking_84 said,
Nice attempt at selling Kinect... But if you actully listened to your customers you'd know that all we want is the ability to use a keyboard and mouse on the couch!
Focus on making this functional and ergonomic and PC Gamers will make the switch to console... Console is a cheaper platform to maintain (as a gamer) and the games tend to have less bugs (or better support) due to the common hardware. Don't think for a second I wouldn't gladly accept these features if only I could retain the controller of choice for FPS!!!
Mouse and WASD are clearly superior in this respect. Halo and Gears of War are not true first person shooters - They are the typical console answer to a FPS, incorporating auto-aim and 'cover/fire' to compensate for the inaccuracy of the controller (or the retrdeness of everyone's thumbs).

I was referring to the original Halo (not Reach) and the original GOW (both of which were ported to the PC), and they were indeed the last two shooters that Microsoft published. Halo 3 ODST and Forza 3 are both console-exclusives (and of the two, only H3 qualifies in any sort of way as a shooter), yet neither takes full advantage of the graphical hardware that XB360 has. How often does it turn out that to play a game on a console as well as the cutscenes shown in trailers show, you have to keep it cranked down to 1280x720? (I'd wager it would be darn near one hundred percent of the time.) Those console titles that have been ported to PC can definitely keep up with that on the PC (and it takes little more than minor upgrades to get there; my own desktop, which is as budget as last year's hardware gets, is proof of that). Here's my hardware setup:

Celeron DC E1200 (clocked stock, and with the stock HSF)
ASUS P5N-EM HDMI
3 GB DDR2-800 SDRAM
Visiontek HD5450 PCIe graphics
WDAC5000AV (Caviar Green) SATA HDD
7 Ultimate x64

Only the GPU and HDD are relatively new, and both are upgrades, and I didn't even pay $200 for the two combined. The rest of the system? Two years old (or more).

The graphics card supports VGA, DVI (which feeds my 23" TN LCD display) and even HDMI (so I could move it to my bedroom plasma if I wanted). The only thing I *don't* have are access to console-exclusive titles (however, I don't like the BOHICA mentality espoused by publishers of such titles, as they often cost far more than high-end PC games; SC2 is, so far, the only game for PC that launched in the $50+USD range ever, which is commonplace for console exclusives; another example of a tradeoff); that tradeoff I refuse to make.

- Buy Console - $300-400 - play games
OR
- Buy Computer -$300-400 - play last gen games at medium setting

And there is little point in buying desktops nowadays, so that Computer is most likely a laptop with Intel 4500M.

Udedenkz said,
- Buy Console - $300-400 - play games
OR
- Buy Computer -$300-400 - play last gen games at medium setting

And there is little point in buying desktops nowadays, so that Computer is most likely a laptop with Intel 4500M.

Your post is as tunnel-driven-biased as the one the OP quoted from; however, you have less excuse for making it. *His* (the person quoted, not necessarily the OP) excuse is that he works in a console-focussed division of a larger company; the division in question functions largely autonomously from the rest of the company; therefore, he's only seeing his particular part of the forest, and therefore, only a few trees. You went just as tunnel-driven with your generalization about budget PCs (both towers and portables) - you are also seeing a small part of the forest, and just as few trees.

While, with a console, you can just *plug and go* (not a bunch of configuration issues as you could be confronted with on a PC), how many games take advantage of the graphical capabilities of even console hardware? Believe it or not, while both the XB360 and PS3 are quite capable of 1920x1080 NI gaming, there are fewer than ten games (none of which are shooters, and that includes exclusive titles) that take advantage of all that resolution. Meanwhile, on the PC, titles that take advantage of 1920x1080 NI (if not taller) resolutions abound, including shooters, racing games, strategy titles, sims, etc., ranging from AAA to casual, and at price-points ranging from console-high to free. And if you are talking portable budget PCs, consider the AMD 78xG chipset (AMD's answer to the aforementioned Intel GMA4500); connect it to an external display (via HDMI, which is a standard feature with the chipset, and is identical to the preferred method to connect a console), and you have *at least* the same resolution capability, and for little, if any, more than a console.

It's still coming down to tradeoffs (not just PC vs. console in general, but within each area), and with the economy still in the doldrums, the battle for marketshare has gotten sharper. The real battle (in this area) will be Kinect vs. Move - Kinect vs. anything else (or even Move vs. anything else) will be a sideshow.

PGHammer said,

Your post is as tunnel-driven-biased as the one the OP quoted from; however, you have less excuse for making it. *His* (the person quoted, not necessarily the OP) excuse is that he works in a console-focussed division of a larger company; the division in question functions largely autonomously from the rest of the company; therefore, he's only seeing his particular part of the forest, and therefore, only a few trees. You went just as tunnel-driven with your generalization about budget PCs (both towers and portables) - you are also seeing a small part of the forest, and just as few trees.

While, with a console, you can just *plug and go* (not a bunch of configuration issues as you could be confronted with on a PC), how many games take advantage of the graphical capabilities of even console hardware? Believe it or not, while both the XB360 and PS3 are quite capable of 1920x1080 NI gaming, there are fewer than ten games (none of which are shooters, and that includes exclusive titles) that take advantage of all that resolution. Meanwhile, on the PC, titles that take advantage of 1920x1080 NI (if not taller) resolutions abound, including shooters, racing games, strategy titles, sims, etc., ranging from AAA to casual, and at price-points ranging from console-high to free. And if you are talking portable budget PCs, consider the AMD 78xG chipset (AMD's answer to the aforementioned Intel GMA4500); connect it to an external display (via HDMI, which is a standard feature with the chipset, and is identical to the preferred method to connect a console), and you have *at least* the same resolution capability, and for little, if any, more than a console.

It's still coming down to tradeoffs (not just PC vs. console in general, but within each area), and with the economy still in the doldrums, the battle for marketshare has gotten sharper. The real battle (in this area) will be Kinect vs. Move - Kinect vs. anything else (or even Move vs. anything else) will be a sideshow.

Problem really is, do people really care about maxxing out the resolution? It still essentially is the same game and if the design theme is good, generally people wouldn't care about better graphics, especially when 360 and PS3 games still wow people with their graphics generally.

I hope you don't mind me saying it not meant to offend, but that kind of viewpoint is in a way elitist. "We have the same thing except better". Personally, all these chipsets and what not does not interest me, I just want something that works, and works for years. Which is the view point of casual gamers, or less hardcore gamers.

If anything, the really important thing these days is lack of lag and loading times in terms of performance.

PGHammer said,

Your post is as tunnel-driven-biased as the one the OP quoted from; however, you have less excuse for making it. *His* (the person quoted, not necessarily the OP) excuse is that he works in a console-focussed division of a larger company; the division in question functions largely autonomously from the rest of the company; therefore, he's only seeing his particular part of the forest, and therefore, only a few trees. You went just as tunnel-driven with your generalization about budget PCs (both towers and portables) - you are also seeing a small part of the forest, and just as few trees.

While, with a console, you can just *plug and go* (not a bunch of configuration issues as you could be confronted with on a PC), how many games take advantage of the graphical capabilities of even console hardware? Believe it or not, while both the XB360 and PS3 are quite capable of 1920x1080 NI gaming, there are fewer than ten games (none of which are shooters, and that includes exclusive titles) that take advantage of all that resolution. Meanwhile, on the PC, titles that take advantage of 1920x1080 NI (if not taller) resolutions abound, including shooters, racing games, strategy titles, sims, etc., ranging from AAA to casual, and at price-points ranging from console-high to free. And if you are talking portable budget PCs, consider the AMD 78xG chipset (AMD's answer to the aforementioned Intel GMA4500); connect it to an external display (via HDMI, which is a standard feature with the chipset, and is identical to the preferred method to connect a console), and you have *at least* the same resolution capability, and for little, if any, more than a console.

It's still coming down to tradeoffs (not just PC vs. console in general, but within each area), and with the economy still in the doldrums, the battle for marketshare has gotten sharper. The real battle (in this area) will be Kinect vs. Move - Kinect vs. anything else (or even Move vs. anything else) will be a sideshow.

....or, alternatively, you can look at what he actually said, which is totally true (cost).

They're not saying PC gaming is dead. They are saying FPS no PC's are not as popular the console equivalents.

Haptic said,
They're not saying PC gaming is dead. They are saying FPS no PC's are not as popular the console equivalents.

Except that is completely wrong. CoD Black Ops is slated to be the largest video game release of the year--but don't worry, nobody plays it...

Haptic said,
They're not saying PC gaming is dead. They are saying FPS no PC's are not as popular the console equivalents.

"Halo did an awesome job of building a first-person shooter exclusively for the console, and now hardly anyone plays first-person shooters on the PC anymore,"

Direct quote from the guy himself. Hes comparing Halo Reach pulling all of the PC FPS Gamers away from PC to Halo Reach based since it's release; which was only a week ago. I'd like to see how hes getting his real time statistics to say PC FPS gaming is dieing due to Reach's release.. So the only logical thing he is saying is that FPS on the PC "IS" dying.. Which is a load of crap. This is why I cannot stand the Halo franchise... Anyone behind them that supports them thinks the games a GOD and is the cause and effect of everything..

The main difference is that noone pays for PC FPS's.. and I quit playing them because it is all ruined by hacks..

Lachlan said,
The main difference is that noone pays for PC FPS's.. and I quit playing them because it is all ruined by hacks..
He did not mention anything about FPS Online. He mentioned FPS as a genre. Most likely the single player aspect of it..

Looks like his statements are lacking realization of how big the real PC Gaming Community is.. Something bads gonna come out of this.. If they're flaming and degrading FPS Gaming on a PC just to improve their sales for the Kinect, I say we all refuse to buy it.. Its completely retarded way to promoting by making a cruddy assumption of which is the future.. Sure over the years you have to spend $100-$200 on a new PC part to keep up to date.. But every 6 years - 8 years you gotta spend $500-$700 on a new console anyways and thats AFTER spending $400 on games for a console thats a thing of the past.. Least with PCs I have a longer time of playing those old games...

++++ PC Forever... Consoles = Casual Gaming; and they try to fit Halo Reach into the pro category by degrading PC FPS only due to the fact that Reach sold 200+Million within the first 24 hours.. That doesnt say much besides theres a lot of Halo and M$ fan boys..

kabix said,
I am still playing DOS games on my newest PC. Could I play an old xbox game on the newest xbox?

Exactly my point so for those who say consoles cheaper lol.. I say look at the bigger picture
Until consoles believe in backwards compatibility with its predecessor games as a serious hands down feature I'll stick with PCs..

Morphine-X said,
Looks like his statements are lacking realization of how big the real PC Gaming Community is.. Something bads gonna come out of this.. If they're flaming and degrading FPS Gaming on a PC just to improve their sales for the Kinect, I say we all refuse to buy it.. Its completely retarded way to promoting by making a cruddy assumption of which is the future.. Sure over the years you have to spend $100-$200 on a new PC part to keep up to date.. But every 6 years - 8 years you gotta spend $500-$700 on a new console anyways and thats AFTER spending $400 on games for a console thats a thing of the past.. Least with PCs I have a longer time of playing those old games...

++++ PC Forever... Consoles = Casual Gaming; and they try to fit Halo Reach into the pro category by degrading PC FPS only due to the fact that Reach sold 200+Million within the first 24 hours.. That doesnt say much besides theres a lot of Halo and M$ fan boys..

I love it when you people say that console gamers are "casual gamers" as though you even know what that means. You want casual? Pick up a 360 controller and play a game of MW2 with me, I'll show you "casual". Ignorance and elitism disgust me about the pc gaming community, I'm glad I'm not part of it.

kabix said,
I am still playing DOS games on my newest PC. Could I play an old xbox game on the newest xbox?

....YES. You can. Holy crap, am I the only one here who knows you can stick an original xbox game into a 360 and it will play? The only time it won't play is if there is a 360 version of the same game.

Morphine-X said,
Looks like his statements are lacking realization of how big the real PC Gaming Community is.. Something bads gonna come out of this.. If they're flaming and degrading FPS Gaming on a PC just to improve their sales for the Kinect, I say we all refuse to buy it.. Its completely retarded way to promoting by making a cruddy assumption of which is the future.. Sure over the years you have to spend $100-$200 on a new PC part to keep up to date.. But every 6 years - 8 years you gotta spend $500-$700 on a new console anyways and thats AFTER spending $400 on games for a console thats a thing of the past.. Least with PCs I have a longer time of playing those old games...

++++ PC Forever... Consoles = Casual Gaming; and they try to fit Halo Reach into the pro category by degrading PC FPS only due to the fact that Reach sold 200+Million within the first 24 hours.. That doesnt say much besides theres a lot of Halo and M$ fan boys..

Also, I still don't understand why you think consoles cost $500-$700. Oh wait, it's more convenient for you to say that then to actually look around. No, a single gamer doesn't need to buy an extra controller because one always comes bundled with the console, and console bundles that include games or live, or even both, are getting much more popular.

LiquidSolstice said,

I love it when you people say that console gamers are "casual gamers" as though you even know what that means. You want casual? Pick up a 360 controller and play a game of MW2 with me, I'll show you "casual". Ignorance and elitism disgust me about the pc gaming community, I'm glad I'm not part of it.

And yet your reply is nothing more than elitism and chest beating. You have long established on these boards that you dislike the PC gaming community - we get it now. Stop trying to shovel it down our throats - it is getting tiresome to read.

LiquidSolstice said,

Also, I still don't understand why you think consoles cost $500-$700. Oh wait, it's more convenient for you to say that then to actually look around. No, a single gamer doesn't need to buy an extra controller because one always comes bundled with the console, and console bundles that include games or live, or even both, are getting much more popular.

Weren't the Xbox and PS3 around $500-$700 at launch? Plus, Xbox games are more expensive than PC games.

Duality said,

And yet your reply is nothing more than elitism and chest beating. You have long established on these boards that you dislike the PC gaming community - we get it now. Stop trying to shovel it down our throats - it is getting tiresome to read.


Elitism and chest beating? Excuse your egotistical mouth, friend, do tell me where on this page you find anything but abuse, insults, and condescending remarks about console gamers? Do tell me, where do you see fair-minded mature non-judgemental adults? Give me one reason why I should bother to have an ounce of respect for a community that treats me and other console players like trash for no reason whatsoever other than to make their puffed up egos stick out even more.

LiquidSolstice said,

Elitism and chest beating? Excuse your egotistical mouth, friend, do tell me where on this page you find anything but abuse, insults, and condescending remarks about console gamers? Do tell me, where do you see fair-minded mature non-judgemental adults? Give me one reason why I should bother to have an ounce of respect for a community that treats me and other console players like trash for no reason whatsoever other than to make their puffed up egos stick out even more.

i can only assume you are talking about getting on xbox live and the kids that scream profanities at people trying to have a good time...

I wouldn't say that there are more FPS PC gamers than there are FPS PS3/XBOX360 gamers, but there certainly isn't a shortage of them.

IMO... part of what is killing it is the requirements.
New console games require the same console. New PC games often require new hardware. For example... the requirements for the new Final Fantasy are high IMO.

PC *minimum*
- XP SP3, VistaSP2, Win7
- Intel Core 2 Duo (2ghz) - Athlon X2 (2ghz)
- 1.5GB ram (XP), 2.0GB (Vista/7)
- Install: 15GB or more, plus 6GB download space (24gb! FOR ONE GAME)
- GeForce 9600 w/ 512 video ram or better, or ATI Radeon 2900 w. 215 video ram or better,

Pc *recommended*
- Windows 7
- Intel Core i7 (2.66 or better)
- 4GB ram
- Same install/download space
- Geforce GTX460 or better w/ 768 video ram or ATI 5770 or better.

At cost... any new hardware is in addition to the cost of the game.

hmm nothing high about that

most pc for a few year now have been comming stocked with a DualCore 2.2GHZ
3-4GIG ram
and 500+GIG HDD

sure the user will need a to buy a video card for shelf pc but N9XXX/N9XX are not that $$
also the AMD 2900HD seems really low I wonder if thats a type error.. cuz I know for a fact the 9600 is way better then the 2900HD.

as for recommend thats not uncommen with today new pc specs

most new PC will come with a quad 2.0/ 6GIG Ram 1TB HDD

once agian u have t buy a video card for Shelf pc but once agian that not that $$

(Bassed on Towers not laptops)

here a exmple jsut picked today

Stocked shelf Unmodifed Studio XPS 7100

Processor AMD Phenom™ II X6 1055T
Video ATI Radeon HD 5450 1GB
Memory 4GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1333MHz- 2 DIMMs
Hard Drive 500GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache

699$ CAD

that out smokes the recommended. as well as more power of the box then a PS3/Xbox with future gaming and upgradible.

The think killing PC Gaming is DRM and thats all...

Steam/D2D etc type DRM is all that should be required... This Secure Rom and always online crap is going to be the death of some titles../

Buttus said,
you just can't play a FPS with a joystick... it's just impossible...
Tell that to the millions of XBOX/PS3 gamers.

satukoro said,
Tell that to the millions of XBOX/PS3 gamers.

There is a difference if you started with a joystiq to kb/m. If you started with one. You are bound to grow used to it then the other.

Explore said,

There is a difference if you started with a joystiq to kb/m. If you started with one. You are bound to grow used to it then the other.

I started with a kb/m but some fps are designed with the controller in mind now and therefore play better there. I don't really work with a kb/m combo so well anymore.

shinji257 said,

I started with a kb/m but some fps are designed with the controller in mind now and therefore play better there. I don't really work with a kb/m combo so well anymore.

Don't those games have built in auto aim to help with joystick?

kabix said,

Don't those games have built in auto aim to help with joystick?

Yeah they do. They need to compensate for the lack of granular control you get with a mouse vs. joystick.

kabix said,

Don't those games have built in auto aim to help with joystick?

It's not like lock-on targeting, it's the same as turning on Pointer Precision on a windows PC.

kabix said,

Don't those games have built in auto aim to help with joystick?

didnt we ban people from our counterstrike servers for using even small auto aim features...

LiquidSolstice said,

It's not like lock-on targeting, it's the same as turning on Pointer Precision on a windows PC.

thanks for proving you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

the only reason for pc gaming to be dieing is if people dont buy the games and they donat keep making them.... i think pc gaming would have a bigger market if there were more games made for pc (mind you that there are a ton made as is) i mean really who doesn't have a computer?

Yeah...right...

Counterstrike, The Half-Life Series, Team Fortress 2, The Call of Duty Series, The Quake Series, The Unreal Series, The Battlefield Series, The Far Cry Series, The Medal of Honor Series...including the forthcoming Medal of Honor game...which no-one will play cos...erm...no-one plays FPS on PC.

No-one plays FPS on PC....f**kin idiot.

Sack him...immediately.

PsYcHoKiLLa said,
Yeah...right...

Counterstrike, The Half-Life Series, Team Fortress 2, The Call of Duty Series, The Quake Series, The Unreal Series, The Battlefield Series, The Far Cry Series, The Medal of Honor Series...including the forthcoming Medal of Honor game...which no-one will play cos...erm...no-one plays FPS on PC.

No-one plays FPS on PC....f**kin idiot.

Sack him...immediately.


I'm of his opposite opinion: The PC gaming market is almost *too* saturated with FPS games.

PsYcHoKiLLa said,
Yeah...right...

Counterstrike, The Half-Life Series, Team Fortress 2, The Call of Duty Series, The Quake Series, The Unreal Series, The Battlefield Series, The Far Cry Series, The Medal of Honor Series...including the forthcoming Medal of Honor game...which no-one will play cos...erm...no-one plays FPS on PC.

No-one plays FPS on PC....f**kin idiot.

Sack him...immediately.

Also the tons of single-player games...

PC gaming is dying because these companies are refusing to make games for them. They are going to the consoles and selling games for $59.00. Give me a break. If i could choose for a game, i'd pick the PC version every time but we just don't get those options so i'm faced with buying it on console.

Intelligen said,
PC gaming is dying because these companies are refusing to make games for them. They are going to the consoles and selling games for $59.00. Give me a break. If i could choose for a game, i'd pick the PC version every time but we just don't get those options so i'm faced with buying it on console.


I personly jsut dont buy it.. not like IM going to miss out on much if I can't get it for the pc..

Intelligen said,
PC gaming is dying because these companies are refusing to make games for them. They are going to the consoles and selling games for $59.00. Give me a break. If i could choose for a game, i'd pick the PC version every time but we just don't get those options so i'm faced with buying it on console.

?????? Hmm I look at the PC I am typing this on and it has both MW2 and BFBC2 on it. I have pre-ordered MOH as well for the PC.

I have a PS3 as well, but its for sports games, racing, and console only games like God of War. I also like games like AC2 on the console better. However any FPS or RTS is pure PC.

I am not sure what FPS options you dont have on a PC?? Look at the stats here on the left side, the PC is doing ok.

http://bfbcs.com/

There is no halo on PC. Thats why microsoft guy thinks nobody plays on PC anymore. He is in his own little xbox planet with everybody saying xbox xbox xbox...

kabix said,
There is no halo on PC. Thats why microsoft guy thinks nobody plays on PC anymore. He is in his own little xbox planet with everybody saying xbox xbox xbox...

Pretty sure every microsoft public speaker has to be groomed with pre-prepared statements that can be backed up by industry analysis.

Sure there are lots of gamers who love their PCs, the reality is you're now a minority in the fps world. If you aggregate all statistics of xbox live gamers and playstation3 and PC, you'll see pc gamers are a minority.

While I agree a keyboard and mouse is the only way to experience an fps, the numbers back up the statement. CoD MoH, anything not delivered through steam.... the console numbers lead the pc numbers.

dotf said,

Pretty sure every microsoft public speaker has to be groomed with pre-prepared statements that can be backed up by industry analysis.

Sure there are lots of gamers who love their PCs, the reality is you're now a minority in the fps world. If you aggregate all statistics of xbox live gamers and playstation3 and PC, you'll see pc gamers are a minority.

While I agree a keyboard and mouse is the only way to experience an fps, the numbers back up the statement. CoD MoH, anything not delivered through steam.... the console numbers lead the pc numbers.

And your stuck in your own little world thinking FPS is only online. Take a look at offline games + online games in the FPS genre for PC and I bet it beats PS3 + 360 combined with users..

Purple Haze said,
He might be right as far as the ratio of FPS players compared to the rest of gamers, especially with the rise of casual gaming.

console FPS includes lame auto-aim, so I'm pretty sure you have a point here: consoles have more casual gamers than the PC... oh wait! did we need this man to tell us that?

Northgrove said,

The only way to play them.

Nah, I like having triggers and vibration feedback, thanks. When I get hit, I'd rather the controller vibrate than have some stupid red halo tell me where the shot came from.

LiquidSolstice said,

Nah, I like having triggers and vibration feedback, thanks. When I get hit, I'd rather the controller vibrate than have some stupid red halo tell me where the shot came from.

As soon as they make full body suits that vibrate from the direction you got hit, I'll agree with you. I, for one, can't tell that I got hit from behind due to a vibrating controller, not to mention how if I spend more than half an hour of gaming on some excessive shooter, my wrists start hurting every time a vibration happens, so I have to stop playing. Red halo for me, thanks.

Metodi Mitov said,

As soon as they make full body suits that vibrate from the direction you got hit, I'll agree with you. I, for one, can't tell that I got hit from behind due to a vibrating controller, not to mention how if I spend more than half an hour of gaming on some excessive shooter, my wrists start hurting every time a vibration happens, so I have to stop playing. Red halo for me, thanks.

+1

SAY what? Whats with these statements of late from MS? Kinect will beat iPad sales and hardly anyone plays FPS on PC? LOL, seriously... neowin please dont post such lame articles and reduce the quality of your website

rakeshishere said,
SAY what? Whats with these statements of late from MS? Kinect will beat iPad sales and hardly anyone plays FPS on PC? LOL, seriously... neowin please dont post such lame articles and reduce the quality of your website

very true. Please stop with the stupid news stories. don't need to post what every idiot is saying. You surely don't want to post articles about my opinions.

rakeshishere said,
SAY what? Whats with these statements of late from MS? Kinect will beat iPad sales and hardly anyone plays FPS on PC? LOL, seriously... neowin please dont post such lame articles and reduce the quality of your website

Its not from MS, its from one of MS's people. I doubt even Microsoft would so stupid as to suggest that FPS is better on a console.

Pc_Madness said,

Its not from MS, its from one of MS's people. I doubt even Microsoft would so stupid as to suggest that FPS is better on a console.

In the world of marketing, they are the same entity unless Microsoft makes a press release saying those are strictly his opinions.

yardman said,
Please he is right PC gaming is dying...
No, you're wrong. PC gaming is not dying. If that was the case than companies like Valve and Blizzard Entertainment wouldn't be profiting from the PC gaming industry.

Anaron said,
No, you're wrong. PC gaming is not dying. If that was the case than companies like Valve and Blizzard Entertainment wouldn't be profiting from the PC gaming industry.

+1

Explore said,
GTFO

+1

Any company saying PC gaming is dead/dying or "hardly anyone plays on PC" can suck a dick.

PC gaming is not dead!

Sikh said,

+1

Any company saying PC gaming is dead/dying or "hardly anyone plays on PC" can suck a dick.

PC gaming is not dead!

Well it doesn't help that a lot of games that are also on the console are better quality than the PC versions. Even though that shouldn't be the case.

Sikh said,

+1

Any company saying PC gaming is dead/dying or "hardly anyone plays on PC" can suck a dick.

PC gaming is not dead!


It's especially funny when he picks among the most popular PC game categories too.

johnnyq3 said,
Well it doesn't help that a lot of games that are also on the console are better quality than the PC versions. Even though that shouldn't be the case.

what part of the game are you talking about? graphics quality? no way consoles are better than a pc that runs the game at full settings. which out modern warfare games on the pc vs on the console. console can't even handle the smoke properly. another really good example is the need for speed series. graphics on console don't even compare to their pc counterparts. if the gameplay itself(functionality) is worse its the developers fault and can go either way. i found borderlands to be less buggy on the pc but found more bugs in the medal of honor games on pc than console.

Seeing how the only things I play on PC are FPS and RTS... I don't see this being very valid or full of truth. Kinetic Marketing at its worst.

shakey said,
Seeing how the only things I play on PC are FPS and RTS... I don't see this being very valid or full of truth. Kinetic Marketing at its worst.

being that you can't even get the name right, I'd have to agree.

dotf said,

being that you can't even get the name right, I'd have to agree.

Damn skippy lol. I couldn't care less for it.

shakey said,
Damn skippy lol. I couldn't care less for it.

Actually, you could. Caring less would involve NO interaction on the subject. You've posted twice. *neener*

Nagamasa said,
Hasty generalization much?

You want to see hasty generalization? Scroll down and read the rest of these retarded and ignorant comments about how console gaming "costs too much" and how they are "casual gamers".

Who the heck is this guy? I'd bet, if you took out the halo crap, you'd find more FPS players on a PC then on a console. At least I think you would. Idk.

SharpGreen said,
Who the heck is this guy? I'd bet, if you took out the halo crap, you'd find more FPS players on a PC then on a console. At least I think you would. Idk.

I agree.

i think if you pull out the major sellers on a console the PC has more especially with stuff like Counter-Strike which had been solid for 10+ years now.

to me consoles will NEVER replace a PC simply because a mouse+keyboard is best for a shooter period as you can never get the quick precise movement out of a analog stick that you can from a mouse.

p.s. besides Microsoft's 'Halo' series is vastly overrated in my opinion. give me Counter-Strike any day!

SharpGreen said,
Who the heck is this guy? I'd bet, if you took out the halo crap, you'd find more FPS players on a PC then on a console. At least I think you would. Idk.

And thus we have an echo chamber. He is right, the majority of gamers that I see are running XBox 360's and play online - the 'real men have PC's' crowd is a shrinking community with less and less people actually caring. The days of computer cases that look like a gay night club with 100s of fans, over clocked components in a stinky teenage room is long gone.

SharpGreen said,
Who the heck is this guy?

I think someone serving jail time. Thus being disconnected from reality.

First not realizing in which market iPad is competing, and then not realizing which game category is by far the most popular on the PC, along with World of Warcraft. It's amazing.

ThaCrip said,

I agree.

i think if you pull out the major sellers on a console the PC has more especially with stuff like Counter-Strike which had been solid for 10+ years now.

to me consoles will NEVER replace a PC simply because a mouse+keyboard is best for a shooter period as you can never get the quick precise movement out of a analog stick that you can from a mouse.

p.s. besides Microsoft's 'Halo' series is vastly overrated in my opinion. give me Counter-Strike any day!

Why would you pull out the major sellers when you're comparing the two? That's like saying oh, if you take the ice cream out of this bowl, the other bowl that still has ice cream obviously has more ice cream.

ThaCrip said,
to me consoles will NEVER replace a PC simply because a mouse+keyboard is best for a shooter period as you can never get the quick precise movement out of a analog stick that you can from a mouse.

On the flip side you cannot get precise movement on the keyboard. I prefer console because I can sneak around corners with better accuracy. Console games are also balanced for the analogue stick. So in fact, you generally don't find it is an issue. It's extremely accurate.

SharpGreen said,
Who the heck is this guy? I'd bet, if you took out the halo crap, you'd find more FPS players on a PC then on a console. At least I think you would. Idk.

Maybe it's time for another 'funeral parade', this one dedicated to the recently deceased PC FPS player. R.I.P.

rawr_boy81 said,

And thus we have an echo chamber. He is right, the majority of gamers that I see are running XBox 360's and play online

The bolded part is important.

SharpGreen said,
Who the heck is this guy? I'd bet, if you took out the halo crap, you'd find more FPS players on a PC then on a console. At least I think you would. Idk.

The guy is probably someone who knows about sales figures?
A quick google search for CoD:MW2 (a fps-game) sales numbers (day one) gave me this:
Around 55% of sales are on Xbox 360, 33% on PS3 and the remaining 12% on PC.
http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.com/s...-million-copies-on-day-one/
So, 88% console and 12% PC. The numbers speaks for themselves.

ThaCrip said,

I agree.

i think if you pull out the major sellers on a console the PC has more especially with stuff like Counter-Strike which had been solid for 10+ years now.

to me consoles will NEVER replace a PC simply because a mouse+keyboard is best for a shooter period as you can never get the quick precise movement out of a analog stick that you can from a mouse.

p.s. besides Microsoft's 'Halo' series is vastly overrated in my opinion. give me Counter-Strike any day!


CS is a major seller just like Halo. To remove Halo and not CS is stupid. Both PC and consoles have their own crowd but due to the fact that $400(and $300) last a full 4-5 year console cycle just does not happen on the PC. There is no way you can build a $300 PC and have it last for 4 years with awesome graphics. And don't say that console graphics suck(beside wii) because almost every comparison I see is nit picking.

Mr_Mo said,

The guy is probably someone who knows about sales figures?
A quick google search for CoD:MW2 (a fps-game) sales numbers (day one) gave me this:
Around 55% of sales are on Xbox 360, 33% on PS3 and the remaining 12% on PC.
http://gamrfeed.vgchartz.com/s...-million-copies-on-day-one/
So, 88% console and 12% PC. The numbers speaks for themselves.

Why are you using MW2 as an example? Only 13% were on PC because the PC version was gimped. I loved COD4 but in no way would I ever purchase MW2, unless I was feeling masochistic at the time, simply because of the obscene restrictions put it in place on the PC version.
The flaws in the PC version were very well advertised and there were a lot of campaigns to boycott the PC version at the time.
The gaming community is very tight-knit, and generally know what's up, so it really doesn't surprise me that the game sold terribly on PC.

With the ease of piracy on PC I could certainly see consoles selling more games in general, but MW2 was a poor example.

S00N3R FR3AK said,

CS is a major seller just like Halo. To remove Halo and not CS is stupid. Both PC and consoles have their own crowd but due to the fact that $400(and $300) last a full 4-5 year console cycle just does not happen on the PC. There is no way you can build a $300 PC and have it last for 4 years with awesome graphics. And don't say that console graphics suck(beside wii) because almost every comparison I see is nit picking.

i wouldn't want to be stuck with hardware i can't upgrade, console hardware was out of date before they sold in most countries (time it took to make and ship world-wide, advanced graphics cards change almost every few months fro PC's, and consoles are stuck with what was made at the time of manufacture - in the XBox's case, 512MB RAM, and a ATI Xenos GPU, which was on-par with Radeon HD 2000 series, which was phased out 3 years ago. Look at what a PC with 1GB RAM and a budget Graphics card can produce now, it out performs a console. When they start offering upgradable consoles, then it will get interesting, and perhaps the PC gamers will stop getting shafted by console ports, poor graphics and gameplay!