Support NeoGAF

[RetroGamingUK]

PC gaming has never been less appealing to me than it is now.

Back in the 90s PC used to get big games (especially FPS games) often years before consoles did and graphically they were a generation ahead of consoles. Ridiculous amount of great RTS games back then too.

These days that has definitely diminished.

 

[Darkness_Arises]

With NVMe, DirectStorage, instant saves… booting up a game and just starting to play is quicker than it’s ever been and I imagine it’ll only get faster.

Quick resume is not a good enough reason to game on a console instead of a PC.

It is one of my major bugbears. Currently, I am playing through MH Rise on the Steam Deck (offline solo no MP). Owing to family and work commitments, I often need to stop mid-hunt. After that it is a crap shoot whether this shit works or not. I need to keep the Deck switched on when downloading a game, this is retarded and just wasteful. Also, downloading and updating while gaming has serious performance penalties on the Deck. I presume this is why the download while gaming setting is left off by default. The Sony, MS and Nintendo consoles have been able to download games and updates while asleep and consuming minimal power since ages, I wonder what is the hang up on PC.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

They still have a glimmer of hopium.

Why are these Xbots always fat sweaty American neckbeards? Crapgamer too, imagine the stench of BO being sat in a room with these virgins.

 

[Wildebeest]

PC gaming has never been less appealing to me than it is now.

Back in the 90s PC used to get big games (especially FPS games) often years before consoles did and graphically they were a generation ahead of consoles. Ridiculous amount of great RTS games back then too.

These days that has definitely diminished.

There were no big games on the PC in the 90s. There was Myst and Doom, which were in today's terms on the scale of indie game budget, but even those the sales figures were not that high. Both of those were show off games for new tech, cdrom multimedia and the processing power of the intel chips. There is no equivalent tech advance today. Slightly faster SSD drives? New GPUs that have such small advances, you need teams of experts with microscopes to tell you why games actually look better?

 

[Quasicat]

I hope consoles become portable/PC hybrids with multiple stores. I'm not rich.

I think you nailed it. People don’t want to buy multiple consoles and did so in the past because of exclusives. The more that Microsoft gets away from this, the more people will buy the console with exclusives. I have all four systems (including the Steam Deck), but those people that buy everything to play everything they are getting few and far between.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

There were no big games on the PC in the 90s. There was Myst and Doom, which were in today's terms on the scale of indie game budget, but even those the sales figures were not that high. Both of those were show off games for new tech, cdrom multimedia and the processing power of the intel chips. There is no equivalent tech advance today. Slightly faster SSD drives? New GPUs that have such small advances, you need teams of experts with microscopes to tell you why games actually look better?

Nah, Quake 3 and Half Life were impossible on consoles until the 6th generation arrived.

There’s nothing on PC these days that couldn’t be done one PS5 or Xbone Series X

 

[RoboFu]

With NVMe, DirectStorage, instant saves… booting up a game and just starting to play is quicker than it’s ever been and I imagine it’ll only get faster.

Quick resume is not a good enough reason to game on a console instead of a PC.

Quick resume doesn't even work on half the gages I play because they are so many always online games.

 

[Wildebeest]

Nah, Quake 3 and Half Life were impossible on consoles until the 6th generation arrived.

There’s nothing on PC these days that couldn’t be done one PS5 or Xbone Series X

Neither of those games were as big as Myst or Doom. 3D acceleration on PC was a big driver in the market, but it never had the same wow moment in the market as multimedia PCs/Macs or the power of PCs with 486/Pentium chips. I suppose Counter-Strike was huge with internet café culture, but almost all of that was probably pirate copies of Half-Life with key gens so who knows. Even there the big tech advance would be internet gaming not 3d acceleration

 

[diffusionx]

classic consoles will absolutely die. we will soon see a switch to a Steam Deck like model from Microsoft and Sony will probably follow soon after.

Nintendo will probably be the last remaining console maker for a while, but I can see them also cave ultimately.

now, is the Steam Deck a console? you could argue it is, just a more open one. so I guess if that's the definition of console then you could say they won't die.

How many Steam Decks do you think have been sold?

 

[Topher]

Why are these Xbots always fat sweaty American neckbeards? Crapgamer too, imagine the stench of BO being sat in a room with these virgins.

lol.....there are only two fat guys in that pic and one of them is British.

 

[kevboard]

How many Steam Decks do you think have been sold?

that's irrelevant. it is clear that high end consoles make less and less sense as it's harder and harder to subsidise them with game sales.

additionally we are seeing a plateauing of fidelity in games already now, and this will get worse over time. at some point you will not really be able to differentiate your new hardware from your old hardware unless it's some gimmick ala Wii.

imagine how the transition from a theoretical PlayStation 6 to a theoretical PlayStation 7 would look like. how do you sell it?

we can already kinda predict what the PS6 hardware will look like. probably RTX4090 like graphics, maybe better... and probably a CPU that has plenty of power to handle anything a AAA dev team can realistically throw at it.

so what will the PS7 hardware look like? because I feel like the moment an RTX4090 like GPU and a Zen 6 or whatever CPU are the baseline in terms of hardware, we basically approach the limit of what the manpower of a AAA studio can realistically saturate. from that point on it will be all about incremental FPS and resolution improvements, nothing you can sell a console with imo.

Raytracing will already be the standard with the PS6 generation, raytracing is ultimately the endgame of game graphics... so selling the theoretical PS7 as "now with better fps!" won't cut it

 

[diffusionx]

that's irrelevant. it is clear that high end consoles make less and less sense as it's harder and harder to subsidise them with game sales.

additionally we are seeing a plateauing of fidelity in games already now, and this will get worse over time. at some point you will not really be able to differentiate your new hardware from your old hardware unless it's some gimmick ala Wii.

imagine how the transition from a theoretical PlayStation 6 to a theoretical PlayStation 7 would look like. how do you sell it?

we can already kinda predict what the PS6 hardware will look like. probably RTX4090 like graphics, maybe better... and probably a CPU that has plenty of power to handle anything a AAA dev team can realistically throw at it.

so what will the PS7 hardware look like? because I feel like the moment an RTX4090 like GPU and a Zen 6 or whatever CPU are the baseline in terms of hardware, we basically approach the limit of what the manpower of a AAA studio can realistically saturate. from that point on it will be all about incremental FPS and resolution improvements, nothing you can sell a console with imo.

Raytracing will already be the standard with the PS6 generation, raytracing is ultimately the endgame of game graphics... so selling the theoretical PS7 as "now with better fps!" won't cut it

It's totally relevant lmao. No matter what PCfats think, the Deck/ROG Ally/Claw/whatever market is miniscule. They are niche devices.

The PS7 will likely be sold the same way the new Apple or Galaxy or Pixel phones are sold. In the early days of smartphones, specs like CPU, memory, etc. were really important and put front and center because every year these phones were doubling in power. As they started to level off, they were sold as platforms with features for the end users, of which the specs is a secondary concern. Nowadays nobody really cares about how much more powerful the new phone is compared to the old one. The value is in the platform, not the specs. Which is why porting your games to other platforms is so stupid but that is a separate question. You should be figuring out ways to grow your platform, not undermine it.

I think Microsoft saw this coming which is why they set up the Series the way they did, they just couldn't figure out how to sell it.

 

[bender]

lol.....there are only two fat guys in that pic and one of them is British.

Two Fat Guys and One of Them is British is one of my favorite 70s sitcoms ever.

 

[kevboard]

It's totally relevant lmao. No matter what PCfats think, the Deck/ROG Ally/Claw/whatever market is miniscule. They are niche devices.

The PS7 will likely be sold the same way the new Apple or Galaxy or Pixel phones are sold. In the early days of smartphones, specs like CPU, memory, etc. were really important and put front and center because every year these phones were doubling in power. As they started to level off, they were sold as platforms with features for the end users, of which the specs is a secondary concern. Nowadays nobody really cares about how much more powerful the new phone is compared to the old one. The value is in the platform, not the specs. Which is why porting your games to other platforms is so stupid but that is a separate question. You should be figuring out ways to grow your platform, not undermine it.

I think Microsoft saw this coming which is why they set up the Series the way they did, they just couldn't figure out how to sell it.

I am taking that trend into consideration here tho, as it is an important aspect.

we see both Microsoft and Sony port stuff to PC. Sony is not as aggressive with PC releases yet, but they are slowly increasing their PC presence.

ultimately, it gets harder and harder to relase consoles at traditional console prices. the hardware gets more and more just a laptop in a fancy box. spec jumps will get less relevant which removes one big selling point. and ultimately it will I think eventually just be more economically wise to make a Steam Deck like system.

Microsoft could make an Xbox that by default boots into their Xbox app in a TV/Console mode, and then you could give the option to boot into desktop mode, where it gets you into a Windows environment.

Sony could make a PlayStation that boots into their version of Steam big picture mode, with their own store. and then an option to boot into a Linux desktop.

this way console players get their console with a dedicated store that ensures compatibility with their system. and Sony and Microsoft both could in one swoop get a decent footing in the PC game store market, as all these games would just be PC games optimised for their hardware.
Game publishers could develop 1 version of their game and release it on all systems with some settings adjustments

 

[diffusionx]

I am taking that trend into consideration here tho, as it is an important aspect.

we see both Microsoft and Sony port stuff to PC. Sony is not as aggressive with PC releases yet, but they are slowly increasing their PC presence.

ultimately, it gets harder and harder to relase consoles at traditional console prices. the hardware gets more and more just a laptop in a fancy box. spec jumps will get less relevant which removes one big selling point. and ultimately it will I think eventually just be more economically wise to make a Steam Deck like system.

Microsoft could make an Xbox that by default boots into their Xbox app in a TV/Console mode, and then you could give the option to boot into desktop mode, where it gets you into a Windows environment.

Sony could make a PlayStation that boots into their version of Steam big picture mode, with their own store. and then an option to boot into a Linux desktop.

this way console players get their console with a dedicated store that ensures compatibility with their system. and Sony and Microsoft both could in one swoop get a decent footing in the PC game store market, as all these games would just be PC games optimised for their hardware.

The sort of people who buy a console don't want a "desktop mode." This is a mistake that a lot of people in enthusiast circles make, because they want it. I have absolutely zero interest in booting my PS5 into a desktop mode where I do PC shit. That sounds horrible actually. If I want to play PC games I will play PC games. I buy my console because I want a console. Spending $500 every few years is not that big a deal, people spend more money on dumber shit.

Enthusiasts see the collapse of Xbox and think something is intrinsically wrong with consoles, but that's a mistake. The point of a console is a (relatively) affordable, easy to use box where you can pop in a game and know what you are going to get. The Switch continues to sell despite the fact that hardware-wise it's a piece of shit that should have been put out to pasture 2 years ago and never got a price drop. The PS5 is selling fine even though Sony totally bungled the game lineup. There is plenty of desire for consoles still. Sony should be trying to make their platform better, not figuring out reasons for people not to stay on it.

 

[Preseznik]

It's less of a worry of consoles being alive or not years from now, it's more of a worry of who will still be making consoles years from now.

My theory months ago was that 10 years from now, the big 3 will shift to Steam Deck, Sony, and Nintendo.
My other theory was that 35+ years from now there is a possibility that the final two will be Steam Deck (or whatever they will call it) and Nintendo*

*= Only if there isn't some new technological hardware breakthrough or if phones don't suddenly become the everything-entertainment-center that manufacturers are trying to make them be.

May I ask why are you discounting the longest running gaming platform which most certainly will not go away - ever - the PC?

I know the topic is consoles, but since every console is already just a walled garden PC (except Switch which is a walled garden tablet/phone format), the PC is just an open console as well.

Even more so since you're mentioning Steam Deck, which is a PC dual booting into a proprietary OS.

 

[March Climber]

May I ask why are you discounting the longest running gaming platform which most certainly will not go away - ever - the PC?

This thread is about consoles.

 

[Preseznik]

This thread is about consoles.

They mention Steam Deck and phones, which either arguably aren't consoles (Steam Deck) or definitely aren't (phones).
Ignoring PC in that context is just *weird*.

 

[kevboard]

The sort of people who buy a console don't want a "desktop mode." This is a mistake that a lot of people in enthusiast circles make, because they want it. I have absolutely zero interest in booting my PS5 into a desktop mode where I do PC shit. That sounds horrible actually.

then don't do it? this sounds like all those iOS faboys who got a mental breakdown over the thought that they can now sideload apps... as if someone was holding them at gunpoint and forcing them to only sideload now.

such a Steam Deck like system can easily work exactly like a traditional console. it would simply streamline PC and Console development. Games released on such a console's store would still need to go through verification and work well on these systems and have settings adjusted for them by default (maybe with a system setting that toggles PC settings menus on and off)

I don't understand people that are afraid of options. what would you as a console user lose if other users of the same platform could click a button to go into a desktop mode where they can install and play PC games from other stores?

 

[March Climber]

I already know where this conversation is headed having had it multiple times over on this forum, but I will be patient about it this time and explain...

They mention Steam Deck and phones, which either arguably aren't consoles (Steam Deck) or definitely aren't (phones).

Steam Deck is a portable hybrid console. It is a device with console-level prices with set specs that can be slightly modded on a hardware level and completely modded on a software level. The reason I bring up Phones, while also being a closed-hardware platform with set prices, is that the generations after ours are mostly playing on phones for gaming. It is a cause for concern amongst console manufacturers and they are trying to figure out ways to adapt before our generation (who still likes consoles) ends up 6 feet under.

Hopefully that explains why I'm not bringing up PC in this thread about consoles. PC will always exist before and long after all consoles die. PC owners have zero reasons to be concerned about anything upcoming, as even if phone takes over, those games will be ported to PC anyway (as they mostly are right now).

The only thing that would kill a PC is some fictional star matrix device from a sci-fi movie that, for some reason, is just as modifiable but, for some odd reason, can't be compatible with PC games.

 

[diffusionx]

then don't do it? this sounds like all those iOS faboys who got a mental breakdown over the thought that they can now sideload apps... as if someone was holding them at gunpoint and forcing them to only sideload now.

such a Steam Deck like system can easily work exactly like a traditional console. it would simply streamline PC and Console development. Games released on such a console's store would still need to go through verification and work well on these systems and have settings adjusted for them by default (maybe with a system setting that toggles PC settings menus on and off)

I don't understand people that are afraid of options. what would you as a console user lose if other users of the same platform could click a button to go into a desktop mode where they can install and play PC games from other stores?

A Steam Deck like system will not work exactly like a traditional console, and for evidence, the Steam Deck does not work exactly like a traditional console. It works closer to a traditional console, but there are still significant differences and most of those things will not be resolved, because a PC isn't a console. So no, it's not simply about giving people options, but in any case, people buy consoles because they don't want those options. You need to start with this premise. If they wanted the option of playing a PC, they will.. play a PC! This is not that complicated, but I guess it takes a PC gamer to make everything complicated.

There's no reason why Nintendo or Sony would not be able to grow and support their platform well into the future, if they want to. The business will not look the same as it does not, but it doesn't look the same as it did 20 years ago or even 10 years ago. They just need to give people a reason to buy into the platform, which for some reason Sony seems to be not as interested in doing under the current leadership. It's a mistake.

 

[Ebrietas]

PC gaming exploded in the 2010s due to cheap hardware prices that got you dramatically better performance than consoles, as well as the centralization of software distribution around Steam. And despite that, console market continued to thrive.

In the 2020s you have a PC market with absurdly expensive hardware prices that will naturally limit accessibility. Steam still exists but up until now it has no competition. Since Windows is open any publisher can set up their own shop with their own exclusive software with their own third party deals, just like on console. Valve cannot compete with MS, Sony, etc on that front. I suspect they know that and that is part of the reason for making steamos and their own console-like devices (which would be a dumb thing to do if consoles were dying). They're trying to de-couple themselves from Windows and PC hardware which are not in their control.

I don't see consoles going anywhere because nothing else out there is an appropriate substitute. It's not PC. Mobile is huge but it's own thing and doesn't cannibalize console. And it's not going to be streaming. Streaming has always been a solution in search of a problem.

 

[Three]

There were no big games on the PC in the 90s. There was Myst and Doom, which were in today's terms on the scale of indie game budget, but even those the sales figures were not that high. Both of those were show off games for new tech, cdrom multimedia and the processing power of the intel chips. There is no equivalent tech advance today. Slightly faster SSD drives? New GPUs that have such small advances, you need teams of experts with microscopes to tell you why games actually look better?

How dare you ignore games like Unreal Tournament and Duke Nukem. The market was smaller back then but these were the big games of the time.

 

[Syphon Filter]

i think eventually consoles will die, they are kind of like a dinosaur right now. it wont be till years down the line though. it will be apps on a tv, the young people are into that, its mainly older people that get consoles now and that isnt the future.

 

[Unknown?]

The PC is already that right now. You can buy whatever hardware you want, not get charged for a pay-to-play service, use whatever peripheral(s) you want to control your games, and the OS is almost free with Windows keys being so cheap. Just having a different OS to install on PC hardware isn't going to cause the market share for consoles to go down.

What you can't do with the PC is pay $400 for a box + controller that runs the newest games. That' why consoles have the market share they have.

No need for Windows anymore!

 

[kevboard]

A Steam Deck like system will not work exactly like a traditional console, and for evidence, the Steam Deck does not work exactly like a traditional console. It works closer to a traditional console, but there are still significant differences and most of those things will not be resolved, because a PC isn't a console. So no, it's not simply about giving people options, but in any case, people buy consoles because they don't want those options. You need to start with this premise. If they wanted the option of playing a PC, they will.. play a PC! This is not that complicated, but I guess it takes a PC gamer to make everything complicated.

There's no reason why Nintendo or Sony would not be able to grow and support their platform well into the future, if they want to. The business will not look the same as it does not, but it doesn't look the same as it did 20 years ago or even 10 years ago. They just need to give people a reason to buy into the platform, which for some reason Sony seems to be not as interested in doing under the current leadership. It's a mistake.

the Steam Deck doesn't fully work like a console because it doesn't want to.

Microsoft and Sony could easily mandate games in their store to work like normal console titles, and could easily make their default launch environment work exactly like a console.

The Steam Deck can not do that because it works with a store that is already an established PC only store. and that's where a PC/Console hybrid system by Sony and MS could streamline things way more and way more easily

Microsoft already has a separate mode where homebrew works and where PC games/apps can be ported over quickly by packaging them as a UWP app.
That doesn't influence the so called "Retail" mode in any way. so what would be the difference for people not interested in the other mode if that developer mode was not a developer mode, but a Windows mode? there wouldn't be one. and there also wouldn't be a difference if Sony did something similar.

 

[Wildebeest]

How dare you ignore games like Unreal Tournament and Duke Nukem. The market was smaller back then but these were the big games of the time.

I listed the two biggest and said they were not that big in absolute terms. What do you want me to do? List every single PC game of the 90s and say that they were all bigger than some mass market dreck like Assassin's Creed 24?

 

[bitbydeath]

There were no big games on the PC in the 90s. There was Myst and Doom, which were in today's terms on the scale of indie game budget, but even those the sales figures were not that high. Both of those were show off games for new tech, cdrom multimedia and the processing power of the intel chips. There is no equivalent tech advance today. Slightly faster SSD drives? New GPUs that have such small advances, you need teams of experts with microscopes to tell you why games actually look better?

You must be young.
Lucas Arts Games
Duke Nukem 3D
Command and Conquer
Sims games
Warcraft games
Bullfrog games

The 90’s was the golden age of PC, it is nothing in comparison today to what it was in the 90’s.

 

[Three]

I listed the two biggest and said they were not that big in absolute terms. What do you want me to do? List every single PC game of the 90s and say that they were all bigger than some mass market dreck like Assassin's Creed 24?

I get that the overall market was smaller but the 90s had more than just Doom and Myst, that was my only point. There was some pretty iconic PC games to play in the 90s (especially FPS), Quake, Wolfenstien, Unreal Tournament, Duke Nukem, Fallout, Sim City, AOE. There were a lot of games that released on PC then were ported to console later when the gen could handle it.

 

[Wildebeest]

I get that the overall market was smaller but the 90s had more than just Doom and Myst, that was my only point. There was some pretty iconic PC games to play in the 90s (especially FPS), Quake, Wolfenstien, Unreal Tournament, Duke Nukem, Fallout, Sim City, AOE. There were a lot of games that released on PC then were ported to console later when the gen could handle it.

Games being ported after some time to other systems was common back then. I'd say that PC ports to console had very little impact compared to arcade ports, as many of these games were just not suited to the format. Sim City was a big seller on the SNES, but that was a 80s game originally made for the C64 then released for Mac and Amiga. Mostly, in the 90s, PC ports were not what people wanted on PS1 and N64.

 

[Trilobit]

If Nintendo and Sony would stop making consoles I think my gaming interest would fall by 90%.

 

[HogIsland]

I am taking that trend into consideration here tho, as it is an important aspect.

we see both Microsoft and Sony port stuff to PC. Sony is not as aggressive with PC releases yet, but they are slowly increasing their PC presence.

ultimately, it gets harder and harder to relase consoles at traditional console prices. the hardware gets more and more just a laptop in a fancy box. spec jumps will get less relevant which removes one big selling point. and ultimately it will I think eventually just be more economically wise to make a Steam Deck like system.

Microsoft could make an Xbox that by default boots into their Xbox app in a TV/Console mode, and then you could give the option to boot into desktop mode, where it gets you into a Windows environment.

Sony could make a PlayStation that boots into their version of Steam big picture mode, with their own store. and then an option to boot into a Linux desktop.

this way console players get their console with a dedicated store that ensures compatibility with their system. and Sony and Microsoft both could in one swoop get a decent footing in the PC game store market, as all these games would just be PC games optimised for their hardware.
Game publishers could develop 1 version of their game and release it on all systems with some settings adjustments

Totally agree with all this. It's also important that the PC market never resets. Valve isn't responsible for converting you from a RX570 to a 4070. They're not even responsible for getting you from a Steam Deck to a Steam Deck 2. The addressable PC gaming hardware out there only grows and it's just a question of what kind of game you're making. A very old PC can still play Balatro or Animal Well.

 

[Three]

Games being ported after some time to other systems was common back then. I'd say that PC ports to console had very little impact compared to arcade ports, as many of these games were just not suited to the format. Sim City was a big seller on the SNES, but that was a 80s game originally made for the C64 then released for Mac and Amiga. Mostly, in the 90s, PC ports were not what people wanted on PS1 and N64.

I was talking about Sim City 2000 which got a Macintosh/MSDOS release before any console. I think the 90s were the golden age of PC games. Developers made PC centric games then ported them over as improvements to tech/efficiency and a different way of doing things were made.

 

[Chiggs]

There were no big games on the PC in the 90s. There was Myst and Doom, which were in today's terms on the scale of indie game budget,

Simply one of the worst posts made on NeoGAF in the last year. Congrats on that, dude.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

 

[Wildebeest]

I was talking about Sim City 2000 which got a Macintosh/MSDOS release before any console. I think the 90s were the golden age of PC games. Developers made PC centric games then ported them over as improvements to tech/efficiency and a different way of doing things were made.

I don't think Sim City 2000 was good on consoles or did especially well there. Technically, it came out, but it wasn't as relevant as Sim City on the SNES. What would happen with these ports is not that people would wait for hardware to catch up, but that the port would just be more technically limited. That's really the whole point of a port. You do it when the game has some hype around it, you don't wait for 20 years to do the perfect conversion.

 

[Wildebeest]

Simply one of the worst posts made on NeoGAF in the last year. Congrats on that, dude.

People don't like it because they have spent all their lives swallowing the hype that regular release of new high-end graphics cards and CPUs is what makes PC gaming great. But they can't factually make a case that it was Crysis that saved PC gaming and not Steam, or whatever. It is just vibes.

 

[Hudo]

There were no big games on the PC in the 90s. There was Myst and Doom

No big PC games?

Half-Life? Command & Conquer? Age of Empires II? Civilization I & II? Sim City 2000? EverQuest? Quake 1, 2, 3? Counterstrike? Diablo I & II? StarCraft? Duke Nukem 3D? Ultima 7 and Ultima Online? Fallout 1 & 2? The Lucas Arts adventure games? Sierra adventure games? Unreal & Unreal Tournament 99? Rollercoaster Tycoon (was at least popular europe)? Falcon 4.0 (which is to this day the most revered flying sim)? Heroes of Might & Magic III (everyone in eastern europe knows it)?

 

[Sethbacca]

There were no big games on the PC in the 90s.

One of the worst takes I’ve ever seen. Ever.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

No big PC games?

Half-Life? Command & Conquer? Age of Empires II? Civilization I & II? Sim City 2000? EverQuest? Quake 1, 2, 3? Counterstrike? Diablo I & II? StarCraft? Duke Nukem 3D? Ultima 7 and Ultima Online? Fallout 1 & 2? The Lucas Arts adventure games? Sierra adventure games? Unreal & Unreal Tournament 99? Rollercoaster Tycoon (was at least popular europe)? Falcon 4.0 (which is to this day the most revered flying sim)? Heroes of Might & Magic III (everyone in eastern europe knows it)?

Exactly, if you didn’t have a PC back then you were really missing out.

C&C and Rollercoaster Tycoon were masterpieces that wouldn’t work out on consoles, shout out to the excellent Dark Reign too.

These days you pay god knows how much for the latest RTX to play console games in native 4K on a tiny 32” monitor

 

[SportsFan581]

C&C and Rollercoaster Tycoon were masterpieces that wouldn’t work out on consoles,

Just to keep it 100, the C&C port on PS was a great. Spent a lot of time with that one.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Just to keep it 100, the C&C port on PS was a great. Spent a lot of time with that one.

Ah, just read that you can play it on PS1 with the mouse so I’m assuming it plays the same as the PC version.

There was also a Saturn port (first game only) however as usual the mouse only ever released in Japan.

 

[Tams]

Perhaps, but the term "console" has gotten fuzzy over the last decade. The Switch is a "console" that you can plug into the TV or play portably on the go. Well.. By that definition, so is the Steam Deck, yet it is also, just a computer in a different form factor. Developers seem to really really like the Steam Deck, and for great reason.

That said, I think as mobile technology continues to mature, these hybrid consoles will become more and more ubiquitous, and the lines of a "console" will continue to blur. Especially if the EU continues to have their way and before long console manufacturers are required to open their systems up to allow competing stores.

No, you just don't know the difference between 'home console' and 'handheld console'.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

omega lul

 

[SportsFan581]

Ah, just read that you can play it on PS1 with the mouse so I’m assuming it plays the same as the PC version.

There was also a Saturn port (first game only) however as usual the mouse only ever released in Japan.

It played really well with the controller, they made good use of the buttons available.

 

[Comandr]

No, you just don't know the difference between 'home console' and 'handheld console'.

OP did not specify one or the other, or that there was any distinction between the two. Furthermore, Nintendo itself refers to the Switch as a "home console" just like the other platforms.

The Steam Deck literally be used in the exact same way. I stand by my statement. So kindly fuck off with your shitty comments.

 

[dcx4610]

There will always be consoles. PCs have gotten more popular but are still too expensive and prohibitive for a lot of people.

Now I'm sure they will be all digital and they might even just be consolized PCs but people are always going to want to play games and need a machine to play them on. Eventually, I think consoles will be streaming only but I think we are many decades away from that.