Not only is it possible to get a cheap PC but I think people are forgetting a few things. first that 360 is costing you $400 at launch for a incomplete system. It doesn't include wireless(add on another $100) it included a crap hard drive(add on another $100-200), no rechargable batteries(add on 30-50 for the play and charge kit), and it only includes one month of online(add in another $60 a year). so assuming you use wifi, are actually a gamer and needed a bigger hard drive(we will assume you only needed 1 hard drive upgrade even with how slow MS was to release new HDs) and actually play online then your talking about $400+$100+$50+$100+$60x7 years = $1070. Now you got the true price for console gaming. Now I'm not even considering that you might need another controller to play with a friend or 2 or 3. I'm not even considering that you might want the kinect or any of the other things that console games will probably want. All of sudden PC gaming got to looking a whole lot better.
Remedy Entertainment seeking to add as many as 20 staffers in coming months for unannounced project "targeted" for future-generation systems.
Alan Wake developer Remedy Entertainment is gearing up to work on a next-generation title. The jobs page on the developer's website states the studio is planning to add staffers to work on an unannounced game "targeted at future generation consoles."
The listing further states that more than 20 new jobs will become available in the coming months at the Espoo, Finland-based developer, with the first wave opening up as soon as next Friday, March 30.
Sales of the original Alan Wake across Xbox 360 and PC have reached 2 million to date.
Last month, Remedy CEO Matias Myllyrinne said the studio is not finished with the Alan Wake franchise. He said plans are "in motion" for a new game in the franchise and teased that a future project from the studio would be released digitally.
For more on the most recent Alan Wake title, check out GameSpot's review of Alan Wake's American Nightmare.
@edinko Listen to me you ass I was simply asking a question that I was curious about. I didnt bash anyone or anything. The next time you decide to accuse someone of writing "uneducated nonsense" you need to have someone translate what the post said because obviously you misunderstood what I was asking.
@PC-RUL3S Well, there you gave me a rich and interesting answer. It's actually out of pure economical convenience. No company is really going to release a console if it doesn't mean a important amount of benefits. Right now a ton of games are released both on PC and consoles. We all know they will look better if you have a PC fit for it, but it's up to how important are graphics and stability for you (not entering into that field, just saying that not everyone has knowledge to tune up and fix issues that can happen out of playing a game on a PC, since each one is different). The technology will always be hold back. What you mention is exactly what I say about .mp3 audio formats; there is technology for making a better compression and quality, it's been there for years but... Why upgrade that codec if we can still sell ipods, iphones and stuff like that suited for em. Also, aside from our conversation: My way of thinking is that the best is having the chance to choose; I have both main consoles and a quite good PC, so I can play console/PC exclusives, the best version when it comes to consoles and (be Skyrim the best example) the possibility of upgrading my game thanks to the awesome mod community. And Steam is a commercial model that I consider a example to follow. Not a single argument there.
@sbdb "That PC must run like crap for games, already a decent graphics CPU and graphics card will cost you about $200 each." Nope. $200 is actually quite a bit for a CPU nowadays. A dual-core Sandy Bridge Celeron clocked at 2.4 GHz is only $52. A 6850 will set you back another $130 and provide enough performance to run BF3 at high settings. That's $182 for both, and enough gaming performance to run circles around a console.
Not even just the graphics being maxed out on current-gen, the processing abilities are maxed out aswell. How come BF3 can have waaay more players on PC then 360 or PS3? Because the 360 & PS3s can't handle anymore processing at one time. Honestly, look at how limited game developers are with current-gen consoles... It's time.
I'm getting sick of everybody saying: "Oh! But keep the current gen consoles running! The graphics are just fine!" it's annoying looking at Forza 4 even in AutoVista (which maxes out the graphics abilities of the 360) and being able to still see rough edges. I need next-gen, we've officially used up current-gen. I would really want a next-gen console by 2014, or earlier. And before you start saying the graphics are just fine, remember this, the 360 was released back in 2005... 7 years ago. The graphics are dated.
@rarson "I just priced out a PC build for under $450 at Newegg that would be fine for most games at relatively high settings. That price also includes a 1TB hard drive, DVD burner, case, power supply, etc. Everything but the monitor, keyboard, and mouse " That PC must run like crap for games, already a decent graphics CPU and graphics card will cost you about $200 each.
@davsonamission You won't be able to play every game at the highest settings, but the fact of the matter is that a lot of PC games look noticeably better than the console versions even at medium detail (Battlefield 3, for instance, looks a lot better than even the 360 with high-res pack). I just priced out a PC build for under $450 at Newegg that would be fine for most games at relatively high settings. That price also includes a 1TB hard drive, DVD burner, case, power supply, etc. Everything but the monitor, keyboard, and mouse (I always reuse that stuff).
Due to the lack of announcements for the next Sony or Microsoft systems, I always assume that when they say next gen they are talking the all mighty WIIU
@PC-RUL3S You might get the occasional thumbs up if you did a paragraph break every once and again. Your wall-o'-text posts are eye-glaze worthy.
@davsonamission YOu are writing a lot uf uneducated nonsense. GAmespy magazine actually has an article about BF3 on High setting PC for 700 USD (looks about 10 times better than on consoles). You can easily build a 500 dollar PC that blows the poor console gfx out of the even water. actually even the modern chepaest PC imaginable has more power and better gfx. I guess you already have a TV so you dont need to buy a monitor. Did you actaully know that the NEXT xbox GPU costs 70 usd? how much do you think is the ps3/xbox 360 graphics hardware worth today? 10 bucks? I am prettu sure you couldnt buy more than a few hotdogs dor it. I dont know but if you can count you must agree that for 700 usd pc hardware you get about 10 times the performance not to speaking of superior EVERYTHING . TRy to stay away from the standard console jealous fans "I cant afford it or am not smart enough to use it it - its terrible" talk. Its not very smart. COnsoles are doomed whether you want it to accept or not. ITs just a matter of few years and 1 more gen before its simply unbearable for sony or MS to produce dedicated low budget gaming hardware. WHo will buy a console with pathetic hardware for even 300 dollars when you can plug in some futuristic 5 dollar onlive box in your tv and play on a 3000 USD PC quality level? NObody
Can't wait to play Alan Wake 2, I loved Alan Wake and I really liked Remedy and respected them after playing it. I just hope the PC version of Alan Wake 2 won't be 2 years after the console version like the first part.
@davsonamission ah it seems the pound sign got striped from my last message. So going by xe.com your looking at 555USD for a mid range and 800USD for a mid-high system. If you want some tips on what hardware to buy PM me.
After the way Microsoft has handled Remedy I don't believe anything until its official and I see it. I would love a proper sequel to Alan Wake, but I'm not holding my breath.
@PC-RUL3S You have to remember that a lot of people don't like gaming on PC so therefore consoles must stay for that group. I am a prime example, I've tried many games on PC and I've even played games on PC that i loved on consoles but i hated all of them except RTS games and MMO games. @davsonamission I bought a laptop for a little more than $800 and it runs all my PC games pretty smoothly. My newest PC game is Civ V and i can run it on the highest settings in single player with minor lag. It'll get laggy when there's a ton of active units at one time but that's it.
@PC-RUL3S Seriously you can buy a $350 -$500 computer and play current games on the highest settings? I honestly want to know because i hear this out of the PC crowd all the time and I am not PC expert by any means, but I thought to have a decent machine you looking at $700 - $1000 just for the tower or am I wrong?
@pcrules ,,, how do you get a pc to run latest games better than consoles for 350-500, seriously?i hate it when people just talk,and when it comes to practice , oh right, plus this plus that, of course you gotta add that too etc etc...
@Warlord_Irochi If this was a fan boy post then I would be saying that consoles will always be rubbish no matter what but I really want the next-gen consoles to be good, if this is the case I might even jump on the bandwagon. I think you will agree with me when I say that the console life cycle is way too long and then you may understand the point I am trying to make when I say consoles are holding technology back. Graphics don't make a good game but every so often when you get a good game that also has great graphics; take The Witcher 2 for example the game play is great and the graphics are phenomenal. The Witcher 2 will be coming out on the consoles in April and again from what I've heard it will be like the PC version but on medium settings. I'm sure it will still look great but to me it?s like a tin of baked beans, PC gaming is like Heinz and consoles are like Tesco baked beans, why settle for second best? I think a lot of console gamers think that PC gaming is too expensive and we sort of have AlienWare to thank for this misconception; if you look in the right places or have a mate that can build you a PC you can get yourself a PC that will play all of the latest games for 350-500 yeah it seems like a lot compared to how much a Xbox 360 costs but once you buy a PC you won't have to pay 40 a year to Microsoft to play your games online and games are roughly 15 cheaper and then you have Steam where you can pick up new titles frequently less than 10.
Remedy is one of the few developers that know how to make games for both PC and consoles right. A role model in the games industry. :)
@RobertBowen Good point they can achieve more out of the hardware but like I do think the console life cycle are way to long if it was shorter I think technology wouldn't be held up so much.
looking forward to it :D Alan Wake was underrated and Nightmare wasn't as good ..but it wasn't that bad.
Might as well state it in big bold letters XBOX 720 TO DEBUT IN 2013. No way in hell I'll be buying it though - it'll likely be waaay over $300.
@PC-RUL3S Maybe console gamers understand that PC are technologically more advance, but they actually don't give a damn about it. It's some PC gamers the ones that seem unable to understand that some people prefer to play in a console. They are absolutely unable to accept that to they point that they need to enter a forum/thread/new's comment section and write a ridiculously long post to try and convince console user about how wrong, misguided and outdated they are for not using a PC. I remember a time when the important thing was games; good games, not being a fanboy of the platform running them like nowadays. Also as a side note: there is little information about the next-gen that can be 100% verified and not just plain rumors. Seems more like that your "from what I understand" is more like a "What I have decided to believe".
This is very premature. First of all I've seen a lot of games that never claim to fully utilize their platform, so it's not like we've seen everything these systems can pull off. The PS3 alone has so much untapped power due largely to ports that only it's exclusives are truly amazing. Second; What's the hurry? It's not as if we're clamoring for new hardware, it's not as if a lot of us have the $400 or more it'll cost to invest in a new system, with additional costs for peripherals, and god only knows what arbitrary price hike games will see again (the last time the standard was raised by $10). Then again, considering how long it took them to finish Alan Wake, an early start wouldn't be a bad idea.
Wow! quite a lot of companies moving to that next gen that Sony and Microsoft insist that it does not actually exist yet.
@PC-RULE3S While I agree with you that PC hardware is a lot more advanced than console hardware, you need to remember that on a console you have a stripped down OS and the hardware is dedicated to one thing - rendering the game. Whereas on PC we have a lot of bloatware and excess baggage running in the background that eat up CPU cycles. Technically, devs can squeeze a bit more out of a console's hardware because it's a static platform. I'm not saying it will compete with next years PC hardware, but I do think the next-gen consoles will offer really good graphics, and the differences in quality won't matter to a majority of gamers.
I see a lot of posts about next-gen consoles but from what I understand the hardware used in "next-gen" consoles will be equivalent to that of a budget PC if purchased today there for by the time the Xbox 720, PS4 arrives at the end of 2013? It will be obsolete in comparison to hardware available for the PC and again the PC will be years ahead of the consoles. One of the next-gen console selling points will be how it runs @ 1080p but what many console gamers don't understand is that PC gamers have been running at this resolution for years and many gamers run at much higher resolutions than the above. We should also be careful of marketing spin for example the game play of the console version of Alan Wake runs at 940x540p while videos can run up to 1080p. I expect with next-gen consoles movies will again run at 1080p but game play will be more around the 1600x900 mark at it's very best and I should add that the FPS will be capped at 60 sometimes even 30; once we are arrive in 2017 and word next-gen starts popping up again consoles will be so far behind PC it will be unbelievable and I really do think that consoles hold back technology if we didn't have consoles all these amazing tech demos and even benchmarking tools like Unigine Heaven would be playable games with in the next few years but instead that looks like it will be 10-15 years down the line.
@Megavideogamer I have to agree with you, an Alan Wake 2 game would be the perfect launch title for the next-gen Xbox! Alan Wake was boss when it was released, loved it!
They'd have a lot of hard work to do because for all of its lengthy development time Alan Wake was a lazy corridor shooter, with an incomprehensible storyline and wonky combat. They really should have held onto Max Payne in my opinion.
Content you might like…
Night springs eternal in this enjoyable yet uneven non-sequel.
- Feb 23, 2012
Users who looked at this article also looked at these content items.
Avalanche Studios co-founder says developer's ambition is for action, not moments that make players cry; steampunk-style game on hold. Full Story
- Posted May 15, 2013 2:33 pm GMT
4A Games creative director Andrew Prokhorov thanks Jason Rubin for telling the studio's story, but says, "We deserve the ratings we get." Full Story
- Posted May 16, 2013 8:44 pm GMT