Furyo Posted August 30, 2008 Report Posted August 30, 2008 I completely agree, if you were a PC gamer you knew about CS. The question is do you consider 2000 era PC gaming mainstream? I certainly don't. For the past 8 years now, the advances in terms of ease of use and general user friendliness of gaming as a whole continue to be exponential. Steam is responsible for making this happen on the PC, but Microsoft and Sony, and even more recently Nintendo reached the untapped part of the gaming market and got a lot more people playing, and finally got gaming a mainstream audience, so much that even general media now can't help itself but talk about video games daily... I'm saying it's in these new people you find the majority of Halo fans. And this is precisely why the previous posts in this thread relating to how Halo had not invented anything got me to post. It's exactly because these new gamers had nothing to compare Halo to in their own knowledge of the gaming market that it grew to its cult status. And this is why I'm saying it's to them our own Doom and Wolfenstein and Duke Nukem, there was nothing else when these came out that could even withstand the comparison Quote
Erratic Posted August 30, 2008 Report Posted August 30, 2008 I guess I just find it weird to discuss these things on the basis of generalizations of who bought what, when, and why. I mean, thinking about it, the PC was probably the most 'casual' centric platform for the longest time. When you look at games like Civilization, The Sims, Combat Mission, and the flight sims of the mid to late 90's, you have games that probably weren't being played by your average gamer. But again, that's a generalization in itself. There's just so many unknowns in trying to determine things about certain groups of gamers that leaves room for a lot of interpretation and guessing that I distrust. Quote
Furyo Posted August 30, 2008 Report Posted August 30, 2008 Sorry, it's my marketing background coming up again. I used to be paid to come up with that kinda crap you know Quote
Jetsetlemming Posted August 31, 2008 Report Posted August 31, 2008 And even if Duke/Wolfenstein/Doom were your first shooters to play, no one will argue that you had to be in a pretty particular group of people to know these games even existed when they came out. You had to have the PC that would run them, something very few people were even interested in at the time, and there was no marketing to speak of, this was all word of mouth, you played these games because you had heard about them or someone had given you their copy. I was FIVE. I played them pretty much randomly, they were included on a CD of shareware games. I had the computer because back then my mom heard on the news that "computers" where this huge growing industry and everyone involved were billionaires and you could easily get in now and be instantly rich without effort so she took a night course in computer science or something and had to buy a PC to go along with that. I don't remember anything about it except it ran DOS, the programming language she used on it included smily faces as characters ( :monocle: ), and on the front of the tower was a button marked "Turbocharge" that changed an LED readout next to it from 16 to 32. I'd push it when I was doing bad at a game. I completely agree, if you were a PC gamer you knew about CS. The question is do you consider 2000 era PC gaming mainstream? Yeah, dude. Gaming in general not so much, but within gaming PC was definitely the huge overpowering dominant force in 2000. It still is worldwide, but has slightly less attention in America. Quote
Meotwister Posted August 31, 2008 Report Posted August 31, 2008 Im with ya jetsetlemming, born in '88 here and played Chopper Commando on our family's first computer. But Furyo has a point in that we're involved now in game design now on this website and we've most likely been involved with games for a good chunk of our lives. A lot of people our age now back 8 years ago probably checked out of gaming after the super nintendo. I think PC gaming may have been mainstream but it was about to pick up a lot of speed and get to where it is now. Back on topic: Anything on if Gearbox is working on Halo 4? That would be... interesting. Quote
Inveramsay Posted September 1, 2008 Report Posted September 1, 2008 Gearbox did after all make the greatest expansion/sequel ever in the shape of opposing force. Hell, I even think opfor is better than hl. I'm born 86 and have never even played halo, probably because I haven't owned a console since I sold my snes... To me it looks like another generic shooter and so far the only good that has come out of it is red vs blue. And yes, wolfenstein ftw, funnily enough sometimes you didn't know if it was germans or plants you were pumping full with lead. Quote
Jetsetlemming Posted September 1, 2008 Report Posted September 1, 2008 Gearbox did after all make the greatest expansion/sequel ever in the shape of opposing force. Hell, I even think opfor is better than hl. I'm born 86 and have never even played halo, probably because I haven't owned a console since I sold my snes... To me it looks like another generic shooter and so far the only good that has come out of it is red vs blue. And yes, wolfenstein ftw, funnily enough sometimes you didn't know if it was germans or plants you were pumping full with lead. Plants don't yell HALT. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.