Because a CPU-core doing graphics would be many tens of times worse at it than even the worst graphics card you can currently buy. CPUs are not built for the very specific computations that are needed in graphics rendering, they are multi-purpose calculators.
...but most console gamers own a PC, too. So if you want to compare prices, it's usually just console vs. graphics card, and not console vs. full blown gamer rig. And this battle is actually won by the PC, as top-notch graphics cards can be had for 200-300$ these days.
The real reason why people buy consoles instead of Gamer PCs is not the price, but the comfort. Even an idiot can set up a console and play. Add to this all the party-games available on console, and you have a very...
Cutscenes are ok in games you have no direct control over one single character (like strategy or party-rpgs). But in ego-shooters and the like, they create an unnecessary detachement from your alter ego, and that's usually not good. Half-life is a good example for games (largely) without cutscenes, but it suffered from frequent loading-screens, which were even worse in terms of "flow"-breaking.
Piracy is NOT theft. It is wrong, and hurts the industry, but IT IS NOT THEFT.
I know a lot of rich people who are even PROUD to not own a single regularly purchased game. For them, it's some kind of sport. They brag about their latest "catches" and are completely baffled if you tell them that if everyone acted like they did, no more games would be produced.
Strangely enough, these are the same people that look down on independent software...they only like ...
Why don't you just list those ten games instead of posting a random insult?
Things CAN be complex and accessible at the same time. But you are right to have doubts, they usually are either one or the other.
Yeah, it HAS to lose users like mad, because it also GAINED users like mad...and let's face it, SL is not really accessible enough for the mainstream user.
You can't compare PC prices directly with console prices. A gamer's PC can be used to do regular work, a console can't.
If you already have a decent PC (dual-core, 2GB RAM), it's not expensive to add a good video- and soundcard. You can certainly do it for under 300$, and it will give you better performance than any console has to offer currently.
But really, what's the point? PCs and consoles offer different gaming experiences, so to compare them directly is silly anyway.
I was just wondering about that. But maybe Far Cry 2 doesn't allow for complex indoor structures, like underground bunkers and mines?
No, and why should anyone care about the actors of the characters at all? I doubt gamers will buy the game just because famous actors are playing the cutscenes...
Seriously, there is not enough information on each page to justify separation into this many pages. They only do it because they can display more ads this way!
Lag has to do with response times and not bandwidth. For many games, a double-channel ISDN dial-up connection is better than DSL, because it has better response times and the tiny bandwidth doesn't matter in many games. But of course, it's terrible for downloading stuff.
I live in a european country, where we have the problem that the last mile from the house to the first network hub is still an ancient copper wire. And because a traditional formerly state-owned company has still...
You don't have to pay them, but as long as you do, why should they change anything? Paying customers means happy customers in economy.
It's a weak comparison, because these are two completely different markets, in one, you buy a tool once, in the other, you pay constantly to be entertained. There is no reason to dump a working MP3-Player (be it an I-Pod or whatever...i personally own a 4 years old Creative Zen Touch 20GB). But it should be easy to see that if you have consumed entertainment from a single source for a long time, and a new source appears, it might be tempting and is very easy to stop paying for the old thing a...
It doesn't make sense to buy another MP3 player, if you've got an IPod (unless you buy it as a replacement, because your IPod is broken). But it's pretty easy to stop paying for WoW and start paying for another MMORPG. If you don't like it, you can easily go back as well.
edit - what the hell, I meant it as reply to thereapersson...
Well, if you have the choice of going to the shop and pay for it, or clicking a link to download the game for free, it's obvious what's more comfortable.
The only reason why I don't pirate games is, because I want to support the developers. If everyone pirates games, the developers won't get paid, and won't be able to create games anymore.
I think they forgot one issue: most games have no or crappy demos. I also don't understand how some demos can go over 1GB and still only delive...
The technology is certainly not here already. Current ray-tracing algorithms work on the CPU, and have to use interpolation, because current CPUs are much too slow to do trace enough rays in a reasonable resolution.
GPUs, on the other hand, could do significantly better, because their parallel architecture allows the casting of more rays at the same time.
Why would they "bring the technology" to the consoles? You only need a browser as a client, so I guess there is not a big leap to be able to use it from your console. Or did you mean the rendering? This probably wouldn't make much sense, because a console is not exactly the ideal server. Or would you like to keep your PS3 running all the time, just so someone else can enjoy OTOY?
Forget the atom for gaming. It is very green, but you pay this with terrible performance. Also, if you still want an Atom, you should wait a bit still, as the current platforms are not optimised for power saving yet. The processor itself is, but the whole platform (motherboard, cpu, ram combination) still burns too much power. This will be adressed in the platforms coming.
Actually, current processors are much more powerful than 64 of the first Pentiums. Not only do they have multiple cores, but their cores also clock around 50 times as fast and they have almost 250 times as much cache (as a single Pentium I). These are just raw technical improvements, they have also improved in many other ways.