Actually, Roguelikes are just gameplay with more mystique. My ASCII art is not commercially viable, but it can turn out beautiful for some better artists.

PC's are better, but cost more and it's harder to acquire good commercial games. Darn RPG's shifting over to consoles or taking too much for my poor CPU.

No, it's gamble-play. If you're making decisions while completely and utterly blind to the consequences of those decisions (even a reasonable guess at the consequences would be an improvement), then you're gambling. You may as well be rolling dice each time you quaff a potion. Your character can die through no fault of your own.

It's the exact opposite of rule-based games like Chess or Go, where the only doubt about the consequences of a particular move comes from not knowing how your opponent will respond. You can't out-think a random number generator.

Nope, roguelikes tell you the consequences. You have to be dumb to fail. It's just like a tabletop RPG. You can take risks, sure, but everything's set in stone, visible or almost visible to the player, he just needs to observe. Yeah, you'll die, and often, but even in a mathematically known constant environment, you get the same chance of failure, just you know what that red potion is going to do. The only gambling is the result of the player's decision, not the random number generator. You will always beat the RNG, it's the easiest thing to outthink. You know what it will do, what it has done, it's merely the mathematical odds, not gambling. The gambling is the fact that you don't always hit with the sniper rifle, you have a chance of drifting off a little. Gamble-play? Look at Morrowind. You aim, should hit, but you don't. Roguelikes are never gambling, merely taking a series of educated guesses.

You, sir, obviously don't understand art.

That's like saying 'Barbie in Fairytopia' and 'Don Quijote' are on the same literary level because they're both printed on paper.

I used the example of rare art from a master because that was what erathoniel himself used, saying he wouldn't pay more than sixty bucks for it.

As someone who likes to attempt to understand art, I can tell you I'd pay much more than that.

Just like I wouldn't pay two squirts of owl turds for 'Barbie in Fairytopia', but if I had to turn around and buy my worn, tired copy of 'Don Quijote' again I would, if necessary, spend hundreds. And that's just for a recent reprinting, not an original printing or something.

Why don't you go to a real art museum and spend some time contemplating true art, or pick up a piece of real literature and stop playing stupid computer games for a bit. You might come to understand the inherent, intrinsic value in real art.

PC Gaming is indeed dying and there are few reasons for it but main one is this:

Production values are growing and most developers / publishers find it hard to return the investment if they are developing only for the PC, therefore, most are targeting other platforms as well... Now, problem is that true PC game cant be played on consoles hence tremendous amount of nerfing and simplifying to make it control pad adaptable... Direct result is that PC game isn't PC game anymore but more of a console one instead... Console games (well, most of it anyway) suck arze hence PC gamers don't bother with it...

Next to this there are few other reasons as well - like already mentioned system specs issue but also to be honest utter lack of imagination and engaging gameplay...

Once PC developers / publishers understand that PC is something else, not consoles, and when they start developing true PC games - things will be better... Or indeed if every console ships with keyboard and mouse so TRUE cross platform development can be done...

In any case - situation is horrible out there...

Few years ago I used to buy up to 10 PC games per year - now, if i buy 1 or 2 i am lucky... Why? Well because there simply aren't any decent PC games out there and no, i am not playing brainless console titles...

So there you go

I remember Hack, now Nethack, Omega, Larn, and others. I also remember those CGA based graphics games (4 colors out of 16). I also remember when DOS shareware DOOM was released. I had barely enough memory to run it (5 MB), and it was not smooth running at that. At 8 MB, it was smooth.

There is a difference between Text Based games and Text Character Graphics like Hack/Nethack.

Interplay committed suicide by deciding to go Console ONLY.

How many remember the SSI Gold Box AD&D games like Pool of Radiance? These were true to AD&D, until they decided to go to FPS style, to please what I call Arcade Phreaks aka Joystick Jockies.

The main problem with most new games is that their hardware requirements are insanely high. This has been a problem for some years now.

Back to Amiga!



EDIT:

Oh, and another reason why PC games are dying is operating system itself...

WINDOWS is SHIT!!!

In near future you will be seeing more Mac based titles which is fine with me since i moved to Mac almost 1 year ago

So is OSX - under certain circumstances.

Mac gaming will never be really mainstream as long as Macs are as marginalized a computing system as they are currently. And I really don't see it changing - because Macs are ridiculously restrictive on hardware configurations, and are entirely too proprietary to fly for one who likes to customize his computer to his whims.

OSX is overrated, Windows is overused, and Linux-based distros aren't ready for prime time. Simple as that.

Windows and OSX are crap. Linux is where it's at.

And what distro do you use, erath? And what incredible games do you play on that distro?

How can you people agree with this ludicrous post when you have an interview linked from this very forum where Brad Wardell (Stardock CEO) and Chris Taylor (GPG Founder) say that its not? PC Gaming is not dead or dying. There will forever be a market for RPG and Strategy games that consoles can NEVER master due to a complete lack of mouse and keyboard.


link: WWW Link

I use Windows, though Linux is better. I plan to move to Ubuntu, with WINE and virtualization if I have the disk for the darn Windows XP system around here somewhere. I can't right now, because my laptop has a screwy sound setup.

Chris Taylor and Brad Wardell may have their own opinions, but they are, after all, developers for PC.

Chris Taylor's type of PC gaming, especially, is dying.

You just told us all right there why Windows must not really be crap and why Linux isn't where it's at yet.

I've been a Linux user for over a year now, and I'll be the first one to tell you - it's not BETTER than Windows, it's just 1)different, and 2)doesn't have as many programs (read: games) for it.

If you Have to use Windows emulation to play your games, why not just stick with Windows?

Um, these two people are not exactly giants in the industry.

Because Windows BSOD's my poor computers to a damaging extent. Virtualization will protect from BSOD'ing the entire system, simply requiring a virtual, not physical reset. It's quicker, or at least safer. Plus, I prefer the interface, most of the utilities I use are Linux native or compatible, and it's more efficient. The only reason I use Windows is for gaming. It's inferior in every other way.

You are right on. I've been gaming for 30 years, and for the last 15 or 20, every 5 years or so "PC Gaming is dead..." then the consoles technology gets stale and Nvidia or ATI starts blowing them away and PC's get hot.

Then a few years later, the next gen consoles come out and "PC Gaming is dead" Repeat, lather rinse...

For me, its all about a keyboard and mouse. Haven't found an FPS or RTS that works half as well on a console without them and those are the 2 genres I play most.

Regarding games written Indie and then went commercial, remember a little game this year that won just about every best game of the year award called Portal??

I do enjoy the keyboard and mouse for most every game. The only problem is that they require a fair deal of desk space. And my keyboard tray fell, leaving me with 30 sq. in. for my mouse, max, so I have a fair deal of lift and dropping.

The last time I suffered an actual BSOD on Windows (across 4 computers) was two years ago when I was playing around with sound drivers. If you're getting frequent BSODs on WinXP or higher, it's either a malicious driver or you've got some malware on your machine.



Yes, and it was built by Valve. The original game, Narbacular Drop, was considered by all to have interesting gameplay, but that's about it. Besides, what Portal is most remembered for is its writing and voice acting, neither of which would have been possible in the indie game (since it was written by Valve's writing staff, and no indie developers could have hired a skilled voice actress).

No, it's because I screw around with Alt-F4 and games. Trust me on this. It's not frequent, unless I'm screwing around with games. Notably, The Sims 2 likes to crash at least every hour, BSOD'ing 33% of the time, and I only save 33% of the time beforehand.

Valve definitely does not count as Indie, and Narbacular Drop falls in the "Education", not "Indie" category. If it's not made for cash, and instead is made for a grade, it's not an "Indie" game.

I used to have to use Red Hat at work. Programs regularly crashed and I was even forced to manually reset the computer fairly frequently. No doubt this was because I didn't know much about how to use it properly, but then I don't know much about how to use Windows either, yet I find it *much* more stable.

The reason PC gaming is dying is because a Console will last you 4 years, and its dirt cheap compared to a PC.

When you have NVIDIA and ATI charging you $500 bucks for a damn video card, you can bet your ass people are gonna buy consoles for $300. I seriously dont get it. How can a top of the line console(dvd drive/processor/video/controller/etc) be worth $300 and a top of the line video card (1 component) is worth $500 when the graphics are just as good?

The main reason to buy PC games was online play, those days are over. Consoles do multiplayer just as good.

Next month Im "forced" into buying a new pc because mine cant handle it anymore. I might jump ship on the next generation of consoles if the insane video card pricing keeps going on.

no, the reason PC gaming is dying is because people don't know how to buy a PC, indicated by the following sentence:



When you have Mercedes Benz charging you $3402384398 for a damn car, you can bet your ass people are going to buy a bicycle for $20!

The 9600GT is $130-$150. The 8800GT is $175 or so. Consoles don't use "top of the line" equipment. Please do research on your claims before you post.

I can't afford a $100 graphics card. I need something cheap, unless I'm making a gaming computer. Consoles don't beat out computers on updates, though. They simply repress quality, not have excelling hardware.

Integrated graphics?

Don Quijote is tolerable, but I'd rather read Dr. Seuss. You use the same argument everyone else does. It's useless, but I'll convince myself it has deep meaning and people that laugh at my purchases just don't understand. Museums operate off charity for a reason.

A joke, one I suspect is more accurate a description of high art than any attributed by the experts.

A couple attending an art exhibition at the Kentucky Gallery were staring at a portrait that had them completely confused.

The painting depicted three very black and totally naked men sitting on a park bench. Two of the figures had black weinees, but the one in the middle had a pink weinee.

The curator of the gallery realized that they were having trouble interpreting the painting and offered his assessment. He went on for nearly half an hour explaining how it depicted the sexual emasculation of African-Americans in a predominately white, patriarchal society. “In fact,” he pointed out, “some serious critics believe that the pink weinee also reflects the cultural and sciological oppression experienced by gay men in contemporary society.”

After the curator left, a young man in a Kentucky T-shirt approached the couple and said, “Would you like to know what the painting is really about?”

“Now why would you claim to be more of an expert than the curator of the gallery?” asked the couple.

“Because I’m the guy who painted it,” he replied. “In fact, there are no African-Americans depicted at all. They’re just three Kentucky coal miners, and the guy in the middle went home for lunch.”