BTW, Macs are Awesome.

[thorfinn]

Oh hi. I forgot to mention. Macs are awesome. Your next computer should be a Mac, assuming you just want a computer where you can do general average day to day stuff and Get Things Done.

If you want to do a specific weird thing (yes, hardcore computer game nerds, that mostly does mean you), then alright, you have special needs, and probably need more thought than just buying a Mac will necessarily get you. You already have the mad skillz needed to go do that. This message isn't for you.

However, for everyone else, if you just want to get connected to the internet, do email, browse the web, maybe do some word processing, download pictures off your digital camera, maybe upload some pictures to the interweb, even have automated hourly backups done for you... then absolutely just get a Mac already.

Oh, and if you're a unix tech-head, you really want a Mac too. Just think, a real Unix OS with a consumer grade UI on top.

See: http://morganjaffit.livejournal.com/34058.html

He says it better than I do.

Comments

[thorfinn]

*chucklesnort*

And yes, you're unfortunately right about consoles and the gamingverse. That's been happening a while.

[morganjaffit.livejournal.com]

I can give you a million reasons why it's fortunately, rather than un - but none the less, that's the split. One of the other reasons that I've moved Mac-wards is that I don't game on my PC anymores, beyond a dash of web game stuff.

[thorfinn]

*grin* I'd be interested to hear your reasons, actually.

I expect that console-world is metric boatloads easier on game developers - after all, you get the same walled-garden-hardware benefits that Apple have. :-)

My question is - can you actually get the same breadth of gameplay in a console? Consoles have always felt a bit "lean-back" to me... I don't have one, and don't like the gameplay style much - partly because they don't have the interface configurability and depth that I like.

I admit - that's not necessarily a good thing... But y'know, I'm the sort of crazy person that likes to play things like a "full battlemech simulator", at least some of the time. Also admittedly, that's why I play WoW and specifically enjoy playing a priest in a high end raiding environment - probably the most complicated and challenging role the game has, in terms of interface complexity.

[morganjaffit.livejournal.com]

Well, piracy is of course a big one. You can't make a big budget PC game anymore, at least not like you used to. Online focus helps, but not every game is online focused. Consistent hardware is nice for the developer, of course.

Mostly, I just don't like sitting at a computer as much as I do sitting in front of my TV on my couch - makes a world of difference.

Now, there's a lot of common-denominator games on consoles, that's true. It's like the Mac in that regard - if you have special needs you're less likely to be catered for. On the flip-side, interface complexity is absolutely not a requirement for depth - and there's plenty of deep games. Of course, the definitive full mech sim is actually a console game - but Steel Battalion comes with it's own controller with hundreds of buttons, so it's kind of a special case.

[thorfinn]

*nod* And as I discussed with patchworkkid, I think the MMO game is finished - Blizzard has won. There will be new "niche" MMOs that will carve out their own spots, but nobody will ever take the cake off WoW.

And... *ponder* Yeah, I don't like the couch, I think. :-) If I'm on the couch, I want to be totally lean back... Consoles feel to me somewhere between lean back and lean forward, and I just don't like that spot.

The different controller fu that's starting to happen I guess is beginning to interest me... But I also just don't have the time any more. :-)

I think I'm having far more fun dancing... partner dancing is by far the most fun thing I do with my clothes on, I think. :-)

[morganjaffit.livejournal.com]

"And as I discussed with patchworkkid, I think the MMO game is finished - Blizzard has won."

Nah, you're dead wrong on that one. Keep in mind people said the same about Everquest back in the day. Secondarily, there's still a lot of money to be made from a non-win MMO. Age of Conan is doing just fine, as will the Warhammer one. It will be a long time before anyone has the level of absurd success that WoW had (10 million + users) but it'll happen inside the next 5 years or so. MMO is by definition a faddish arena.

As for not liking consoles - there's plenty of lean back options, and plenty of lean forward options on any modern console. If you were more familiar with the breadth of stuff I think you'd be potentially convinced.

[thorfinn]

The thing that's different for WoW is that Blizzard have already, and will continue to, adapt WoW to keep pace with the state of the art in MMO-fu. A big part of that is that they really are engineering their product, as opposed to just programming, and there's a continuous cycle of well informed engine/toolbox improvement going on, which flows on into the game plots/story/mechanics.

OTOH, there is a risk that WoW may become "too complex" after the next expansion. If it does that, then they'll start to decline. But again, I suspect they're thinking about how to solve that already. Not sure how they'll do it yet, but they show signs of thinking about it.

And you may well be right re the console fu. :-) OTOH, I play about 4-5 hours a week of games, tops, so I don't really have any incentive to switch... yet. And yes, you're also right about my preferences in the game-space being uncommon, and therefore mostly not catered for. :-)

[thorfinn]

Revisit on this thread - WotLK is out... it is indeed clear that Blizz has been thinking about the complexity issue - most classes got a maximum of two new spells, and although they got plenty of new talents, that's not a huge issue because talents aren't something you go and change every day (well, not most people, anyway).

Also they re-balanced the available stats, and have indicated that they're unhappy with the way mana stats and regen works (but have no solution as yet), because it's quite complicated right now.

Plus a startling number of engine improvements and gameplay improvements... and nicked a lot of ideas from all the new MMOs, as I said they would. :-)

[nigelw.livejournal.com]

From my POV, I don't like consoles (particularly for FPS games) because (a) I don't have enough buttons, and (b) I can't steer with a mouse. I *hate* trying to steer with thumb-joysticks or directional pads - it feels like trying to walk through jelly.

[morganjaffit.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but that just makes you a weird edge-case person (which is fine - we all are weird edge cases about something or other). For 95% of people, console FPS controls is just fine. Same as the Mac argument, really - how do you do right by most people, rather than how do you do right by people with hard-core needs.

Of course, the key to Blizzards success is it does both.