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.
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"?
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.
Post edited by Phaserlight on
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
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.
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"?
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.
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.
I think in that situation they are equally on the same footing. PS4 and the Switch are perhaps further behind, but I guess it's not so hard to expect Microsoft, who created the XB platform with the windows 10 architecture. In the near future a linked XB1 and PC should be able to play the same games, with the only issue stopping them from doing it now, is the M&K support on the XB.
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.
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"?
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.
A console is, literally, a mid-range gaming PC. The only difference is the platforms they run. The difference between a console and a gaming PC is equivalent to the difference between a Windows PC and a Mac. The hardware is comparable to a mid-range gaming PC. The biggest issue with developing for them is the fact that the operating platforms and API sets are often completely different from PC platforms. This is something that Microsoft has continuously seemed to address (i.e. XNA).
What I'm saying is that the differences between PC and Console are largely coincidental. Yes, PCs use KB/Mouse and Consoles use Controller - but both platforms support the other input options, at this point... This is not a difference. The defaults and "generally accepted" inputs simply differ between the two (while both support both). Also, the ability to use third party peripherals is better on PC due to the open nature of the platform (the ability to install third party device drivers and configuration software).
Consoles and PCs have pretty much already converged to a large extent. If you think that mobile-PC is converging faster than console-PC, then you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. That statement is ridiculous.
The UI of the console dines't matter because it is only evident when you are out of hte game. Aside from that, the UIs are quite similar. This is no different than the UI of a Windows PC when compared to a macOS or Linux desktop.
Yes, the UIs are different... When you're out in the operating system navigating around things. The minute you launch the game, these differences are largely (if not completely) leveled. It doesn't matter at all. It's completely ignorable.
The only differences that matter between console and PC, at this point, is the internal hardware configuration of the consoles. That's one of the only thing that generally holds consoles back, along with the generally accepted input method having an impact on how some game systems are developed (i.e. Aim Assist in Console FPS games, Frame Rate Limiters, etc.). This is because consoles aren't easily upgradeable (aside from the HDD in a PS4) while desktop gaming PCs can have major components upgraded (CPU, GPU, RAM, Storage, Networking, Sound Card, Peripheral and Peripheral Support).
The only major disadvantage that consoles face, at this point, is in raw hardware power when compared to high end gaming rigs. For people with weaker PCs, the consoles may actually game better than their PCs - which is why people like them so much.
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.
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"?
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.
Yes, the UIs are different... When you're out in the operating system navigating around things. The minute you launch the game, these differences are largely (if not completely) leveled. It doesn't matter at all. It's completely ignorable.
The only differences that matter between console and PC, at this point, is the internal hardware configuration of the consoles. That's one of the only thing that generally holds consoles back, along with the generally accepted input method having an impact on how some game systems are developed (i.e. Aim Assist in Console FPS games, Frame Rate Limiters, etc.). This is because consoles aren't easily upgradeable (aside from the HDD in a PS4) while desktop gaming PCs can have major components upgraded (CPU, GPU, RAM, Storage, Networking, Sound Card, Peripheral and Peripheral Support).
The only major disadvantage that consoles face, at this point, is in raw hardware power when compared to high end gaming rigs. For people with weaker PCs, the consoles may actually game better than their PCs - which is why people like them so much.
I thought the major difference between console and PC is the OS. Else hackers would easily port playstation games on PC.
I was reading on population of ESO on PC vs console. Though no one know the real number but people suggest the number is quite evenly distributed.
Maybe Blizzard can consider releasing Wow on console. It might boost it's population more. Though Blizzard would need to pay royalty to Sony. I think the average of royalty is 30%, so a 15$ subscription would mean sony get 4.5$ out of it. But Blizzard might get discount for being a large company.
One thing that makes no sense to me is why Microsoft hasn't added controller navigation to the Windows OS. To me, that is a no-brainer as an option. Not everyone wants to use it with mouse/keyboard or touchscreen. Not everyone wants to buy an Xbox for their TV. It's just too locked down. You can't do very much with it other than watch movies and play games. To some that is OK, but enjoy having options personally. I don't think there is even a Linux OS with official controller support. It's kind of sad.
One thing that makes no sense to me is why Microsoft hasn't added controller navigation to the Windows OS. To me, that is a no-brainer as an option. Not everyone wants to use it with mouse/keyboard or touchscreen. Not everyone wants to buy an Xbox for their TV. It's just too locked down. You can't do very much with it other than watch movies and play games. To some that is OK, but enjoy having options personally. I don't think there is even a Linux OS with official controller support. It's kind of sad.
That is how they make money. Every game sold on Xbox microsoft get royalty. If it is sold on PC Microsoft get none.
They'll only add support if they make money(for example subscription streaming service).
One thing that makes no sense to me is why Microsoft hasn't added controller navigation to the Windows OS. To me, that is a no-brainer as an option. Not everyone wants to use it with mouse/keyboard or touchscreen. Not everyone wants to buy an Xbox for their TV. It's just too locked down. You can't do very much with it other than watch movies and play games. To some that is OK, but enjoy having options personally. I don't think there is even a Linux OS with official controller support. It's kind of sad.
That is how they make money. Every game sold on Xbox microsoft get royalty. If it is sold on PC Microsoft get none.
They'll only add support if they make money(for example subscription streaming service).
That is true, but it's still unfortunate. I think all they would need to do is change the kernel to allow one of the analog sticks to move the mouse cursor and have buttons that take the place or right and left click. That would be enough for most purposes. They could modify the touchscreen keyboard to work with the controller. They could also promote the use of the chatpad as a Windows keyboard. This would make them more money in terms of selling hardware.
One advantage consoles have is built in social connectivity. You can even play single player games together. It is inherently a more social platform. PCs can get there through Discord or Teamspeak or whatever, but it's not built in like most console platforms.
I always felt the opposite. That may be changing in modern times. People on PC have been connected through the internet for a long time. People in MMOs chatted through typing on keyboards. I guess one might say it's easier to find someone on console as it's all one hub. On PC usually, each game and software is independent.
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.
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.
A console is, literally, a mid-range gaming PC. The only difference is the platforms they run. The difference between a console and a gaming PC is equivalent to the difference between a Windows PC and a Mac. The hardware is comparable to a mid-range gaming PC. The biggest issue with developing for them is the fact that the operating platforms and API sets are often completely different from PC platforms. This is something that Microsoft has continuously seemed to address (i.e. XNA).
What I'm saying is that the differences between PC and Console are largely coincidental. Yes, PCs use KB/Mouse and Consoles use Controller - but both platforms support the other input options, at this point... This is not a difference. The defaults and "generally accepted" inputs simply differ between the two (while both support both). Also, the ability to use third party peripherals is better on PC due to the open nature of the platform (the ability to install third party device drivers and configuration software).
Consoles and PCs have pretty much already converged to a large extent. If you think that mobile-PC is converging faster than console-PC, then you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. That statement is ridiculous.
The UI of the console dines't matter because it is only evident when you are out of hte game. Aside from that, the UIs are quite similar. This is no different than the UI of a Windows PC when compared to a macOS or Linux desktop.
Yes, the UIs are different... When you're out in the operating system navigating around things. The minute you launch the game, these differences are largely (if not completely) leveled. It doesn't matter at all. It's completely ignorable.
The only differences that matter between console and PC, at this point, is the internal hardware configuration of the consoles. That's one of the only thing that generally holds consoles back, along with the generally accepted input method having an impact on how some game systems are developed (i.e. Aim Assist in Console FPS games, Frame Rate Limiters, etc.). This is because consoles aren't easily upgradeable (aside from the HDD in a PS4) while desktop gaming PCs can have major components upgraded (CPU, GPU, RAM, Storage, Networking, Sound Card, Peripheral and Peripheral Support).
The only major disadvantage that consoles face, at this point, is in raw hardware power when compared to high end gaming rigs. For people with weaker PCs, the consoles may actually game better than their PCs - which is why people like them so much.
The vast majority of people use a controller on a console, not a mouse and keyboard; this paradigm permeates every aspect of console game design: the social aspect in a game like ESO is much different than a game where you have people chatting to each other via keyboard. Simply because a console has support for a peripheral like a keyboard doesn't mean people will use it or that the game library will be designed around it. If this changes, well then I suppose I would have to take another look at your claim that consoles are only meaningfully different from PCs in terms of internal hardware. Right now though, entire genres such as RTS or realistic flight sims are more or less relegated to PC.
You are claiming something is "completely ignorable" when it isn't. Set aside for a minute that your statement more or less invalidates UI designer as a career path; a game like Starcraft more or less requires a mouse and keyboard in order to play. Selecting units on a screen is indeed part of the User Interface, and is not "completely ignorable".
I could easily do taxes, invest money, build a social network, look for a job, or find a date on my phone or a PC. In that sense they are more similar than a PC and a console.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Comments
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.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
I think in that situation they are equally on the same footing. PS4 and the Switch are perhaps further behind, but I guess it's not so hard to expect Microsoft, who created the XB platform with the windows 10 architecture. In the near future a linked XB1 and PC should be able to play the same games, with the only issue stopping them from doing it now, is the M&K support on the XB.
What I'm saying is that the differences between PC and Console are largely coincidental. Yes, PCs use KB/Mouse and Consoles use Controller - but both platforms support the other input options, at this point... This is not a difference. The defaults and "generally accepted" inputs simply differ between the two (while both support both). Also, the ability to use third party peripherals is better on PC due to the open nature of the platform (the ability to install third party device drivers and configuration software).
Consoles and PCs have pretty much already converged to a large extent. If you think that mobile-PC is converging faster than console-PC, then you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. That statement is ridiculous.
The UI of the console dines't matter because it is only evident when you are out of hte game. Aside from that, the UIs are quite similar. This is no different than the UI of a Windows PC when compared to a macOS or Linux desktop.
Yes, the UIs are different... When you're out in the operating system navigating around things. The minute you launch the game, these differences are largely (if not completely) leveled. It doesn't matter at all. It's completely ignorable.
The only differences that matter between console and PC, at this point, is the internal hardware configuration of the consoles. That's one of the only thing that generally holds consoles back, along with the generally accepted input method having an impact on how some game systems are developed (i.e. Aim Assist in Console FPS games, Frame Rate Limiters, etc.). This is because consoles aren't easily upgradeable (aside from the HDD in a PS4) while desktop gaming PCs can have major components upgraded (CPU, GPU, RAM, Storage, Networking, Sound Card, Peripheral and Peripheral Support).
The only major disadvantage that consoles face, at this point, is in raw hardware power when compared to high end gaming rigs. For people with weaker PCs, the consoles may actually game better than their PCs - which is why people like them so much.
I was reading on population of ESO on PC vs console. Though no one know the real number but people suggest the number is quite evenly distributed.
Maybe Blizzard can consider releasing Wow on console. It might boost it's population more. Though Blizzard would need to pay royalty to Sony. I think the average of royalty is 30%, so a 15$ subscription would mean sony get 4.5$ out of it. But Blizzard might get discount for being a large company.
They'll only add support if they make money(for example subscription streaming service).
~~ postlarval ~~
You are claiming something is "completely ignorable" when it isn't. Set aside for a minute that your statement more or less invalidates UI designer as a career path; a game like Starcraft more or less requires a mouse and keyboard in order to play. Selecting units on a screen is indeed part of the User Interface, and is not "completely ignorable".
I could easily do taxes, invest money, build a social network, look for a job, or find a date on my phone or a PC. In that sense they are more similar than a PC and a console.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance