| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (7)

Posted: Apr 3rd 2007 11:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd say this has more to do with the simple fact that controller toting players would get slaughtered.

iD would essentially have to come up with some sort of handicap system to balance the gameplay.
Reply

Posted: Apr 3rd 2007 11:42PM copa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Could the $50 Live entry fee for Xbox-PC multiplayer prove to be a turn-off for developers?"

I'd say a much bigger turnoff is that Microsoft won't release the API's for cross-platform play to third-party developers.

http://play.tm/story/10013
Reply

Posted: Apr 4th 2007 7:17AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Great. Now I'm going to have that tune in my head all day.

Hot MP4 Converter
http://www.mp4-converter.net
Reply

Posted: Apr 4th 2007 2:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Quake really sucks after Quake III.
Reply

Posted: Apr 4th 2007 4:44AM DrXym said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Live Anywhere makes it sound like it would be impossible to enable PS3, 360 & PC versions of the same game to share servers right now.

Of course they could, however I don't think it is desirable for a couple of reasons.

First, consoles and PCs are far too different to develop for. On the PC, the publisher can push a patch when they feel like it from whatever server they like. On the PS3 and 360 they have certain obligations to the platform's technical requirements and certification which make patch deployment much slower. And on the 360 they have to deal with XBox Live and how do you share servers when MS wants exclusivity, or at least to shut out PS3s from the picture. In short, supporting 3 platforms is a development and QA nightmare.

Second is from a player perspective. It is far, far, far easier to play an FPS on a PC. A mouse and keyboard make it easier to move around, jump, turn, shoot and even hotkey actions. Console users would be slaughtered as they feebly rotate at the max speed their sticks allow. PCs also allow for higher resolutions (some console users may even be on SD TVs) and higher refresh rates, and users tend to be closer to the screen meaning they'll have the sight advantage too.

I can see the appeal of 360 vs PS3, but I don't see PC vs console even being possible. And 360 vs PS3 isn't going to happen while Microsoft hold the keys to the online cage that 360 players find themselves in.
Reply

Posted: Apr 4th 2007 6:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Quake really sucks after Quake III."

So that'll be the one game then; Quake 4?
Reply

Posted: Apr 4th 2007 9:35AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In a perfect world pc and consoles gamers would consider each other as fellow gamers. I vote to keep the Lobby's segregated since the Hatfields and Mckoys will never get along.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

WRUP: All the Reckoning

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 11:45PM

Xbox Live Indie Gems: Nyan Cat Adventure

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 10:15PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW