This is a Xbox 360 fan only forum. If you're not here to root for the home team please find another forum that better suits your taste.

Thank you for your interest,

Xbox Republic Admins

NOTE: If you can't register it may be due to a temporary lockdown. Wait a day or two and we will probably have reopened for new registrations.



 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
PureSexySound
Petty Officer 3rd Class
Petty Officer 3rd Class


Posts : 95
Join date : 2010-09-08

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:50 pm

Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.

You are forgetting two things, and I shall list the, for you (Keep in mind that I do not have a gaming PC nor do I intend to get one, so I am NOT a PC Elitist):

1. When you build that gaming PC for "$500", you are forgetting that you also get a PC with that. One that is above the capabilities of a standard PC at that, since it has much more intense RAM and Graphic Cards.

2. You don't have an inferior selection of games.. If you don't like a keyboard or mouse, or don't like mainly playing FPS's and RTS's, it is relentlessly simple to just get a controller.. GAME in the UK sells Ps3/360 formatted PC controllers for £10. You can get programmes for free that enable you to support motion control etc. AND you are forgetting the possibility (if you want to go down that road) of emulation of hand-helds and previous gen consoles.

PC gaming isn't for everyone, but you shouldn't knock it because it isn't for you.
Back to top Go down
Pickles
Chief Warrant Officer 4
Chief Warrant Officer 4
avatar

Posts : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-01

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Sun Jan 02, 2011 7:30 pm

Stoney wrote:
I constantly hear people say "you can build a good gaming PC for 300-400 dollars" I want to know where you would buy a regular PC for that cheap? Unless of course it's garbage?

I've always wondered that myself.

PC games don't appeal to me so when I move out I wanna get a standard bare-bones PC for cheaper than 300 dollars.

That'd be pretty sweet.
Back to top Go down
Pickles
Chief Warrant Officer 4
Chief Warrant Officer 4
avatar

Posts : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-01

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:01 am

Hmm...looks like we won't be seeing any of BBC's smart alecky comments in this thread...
Back to top Go down
Ozsem
Master Chief Petty Officer
Master Chief Petty Officer


Posts : 498
Join date : 2009-12-02
Age : 33

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Tue Jan 04, 2011 12:31 pm

Pickles wrote:
Hmm...looks like we won't be seeing any of BBC's smart alecky comments in this thread...

Come to mention it I havn't seen him on here for quite awhile. Havn't seen him on this forum in general.
Back to top Go down
Spartan v07
Fleet Master Chief Petty Officer
Fleet Master Chief Petty Officer
avatar

Posts : 690
Join date : 2009-09-11

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Tue Jan 04, 2011 5:49 pm

Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.

1,000 dollars is all you need for a decent pc,yes it's a bit more than 3 consoles but it can do way more than all consoles combined. Also PC has way more games and better library than all combined. You can get games from the 90's till now. For consoles they are limited for that consoles life span. PC is way better for games,better graphics,mods,replayability for online games and much much more.
Back to top Go down
Pickles
Chief Warrant Officer 4
Chief Warrant Officer 4
avatar

Posts : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-01

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:22 am

Spartan v07 wrote:
Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.

1,000 dollars is all you need for a decent pc,yes it's a bit more than 3 consoles but it can do way more than all consoles combined. Also PC has way more games and better library than all combined. You can get games from the 90's till now. For consoles they are limited for that consoles life span. PC is way better for games,better graphics,mods,replayability for online games and much much more.

"much much more"

Meaning that's all he could think of.
Back to top Go down
ghost23
Four Star General (Moderator)
Four Star General (Moderator)


Posts : 3425
Join date : 2009-12-16
Location : Australia

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Wed Jan 05, 2011 4:13 am

Spartan v07 wrote:
Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.

1,000 dollars is all you need for a decent pc,yes it's a bit more than 3 consoles but it can do way more than all consoles combined. Also PC has way more games and better library than all combined. You can get games from the 90's till now. For consoles they are limited for that consoles life span. PC is way better for games,better graphics,mods,replayability for online games and much much more.

Yeah you can get games from the 90's but how often do you want to play them because they really don't hold up well. Consoles are not just limited to its life span, the XBOX 360 at least has backwards compatibility with most of the XBOX titles. Whether the PC has a better library is highly debatable since there are not many developers who still make PC exclusives these days.
PC has better:
Graphics- Depends how much you are willing to spend. I'd rather have the slightly inferior graphics of the consoles with the knowledge that when I get home, I am guaranteed to be able to play it
Mods- Yes PC does have an advantage there
Re-playability for online games- I don't see what you are getting at here. XBOX Live and PSN are both great online gaming services that offer plenty of replayability.
Back to top Go down
Blackou7
Petty Officer 1st Class
Petty Officer 1st Class
avatar

Posts : 164
Join date : 2010-02-26

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:58 am

I understand what the other guy is trying to say. There are little things that can be complicated with PC gaming to the common person not savvy with computers. People just prefer to get home from a long day of work and pop in a game and play for 1 to 2 hours and be done.

Not everyone lives and breathes gaming and want to spend the money on a PC or even learn what they need to build one.

Personally I think PC gaming is great, had to ask a load of questions and do a lot of reading to some what understand the ins and outs on how to build a decent rig.
Back to top Go down
Invincible
Fleet Master Chief Petty Officer
Fleet Master Chief Petty Officer
avatar

Posts : 672
Join date : 2010-03-18

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:50 am

Spartan v07 wrote:
Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.

1,000 dollars is all you need for a decent pc,yes it's a bit more than 3 consoles but it can do way more than all consoles combined. Also PC has way more games and better library than all combined. You can get games from the 90's till now. For consoles they are limited for that consoles life span. PC is way better for games,better graphics,mods,replayability for online games and much much more.

Any of the current gen consoles give you a great selection of games from the 80's till now. Either through backwards compatibility or download. Yes, you can get a lot of those games through emulation on PC, but it's not legal and you run the risk of getting a virus if you're not careful. I personally have little interest in games from when I was a kid. Been there, done that. I want the latest and greatest. And that's where consoles win.

"PC is way better for games"...can't play Mario Galaxy, Red Dead Redemption, Uncharted 2, and Halo Reach on PC. Some of the highest rated games this gen. I'd gladly trade those for StarCraft and WoW.

"better graphics"...totally subjective.

"mods" all current gen systems offer mods of some sort

"replayability for online games"... I'm not sure if anyone is still playing Marvel Ultimate Alliance co-op on any platform. But if a games popular, you can find players on any system.
Back to top Go down
PureSexySound
Petty Officer 3rd Class
Petty Officer 3rd Class


Posts : 95
Join date : 2010-09-08

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:42 pm

Invincible wrote:
"mods" all current gen systems offer mods of some sort

No. Just, no. You are horribly misinformed, it is awful.
Back to top Go down
Pickles
Chief Warrant Officer 4
Chief Warrant Officer 4
avatar

Posts : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-01

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:28 pm

PureSexySound wrote:
Invincible wrote:
"mods" all current gen systems offer mods of some sort

No. Just, no. You are horribly misinformed, it is awful.

The only game I could think of that has mods is Unreal Tournament on the Ps3.

I don't really know if there are others though...
Back to top Go down
Spartan v07
Fleet Master Chief Petty Officer
Fleet Master Chief Petty Officer
avatar

Posts : 690
Join date : 2009-09-11

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:56 pm

Invincible wrote:
Spartan v07 wrote:
Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.

1,000 dollars is all you need for a decent pc,yes it's a bit more than 3 consoles but it can do way more than all consoles combined. Also PC has way more games and better library than all combined. You can get games from the 90's till now. For consoles they are limited for that consoles life span. PC is way better for games,better graphics,mods,replayability for online games and much much more.

Any of the current gen consoles give you a great selection of games from the 80's till now. Either through backwards compatibility or download. Yes, you can get a lot of those games through emulation on PC, but it's not legal and you run the risk of getting a virus if you're not careful. I personally have little interest in games from when I was a kid. Been there, done that. I want the latest and greatest. And that's where consoles win.

"PC is way better for games"...can't play Mario Galaxy, Red Dead Redemption, Uncharted 2, and Halo Reach on PC. Some of the highest rated games this gen. I'd gladly trade those for StarCraft and WoW.

"better graphics"...totally subjective.

"mods" all current gen systems offer mods of some sort

"replayability for online games"... I'm not sure if anyone is still playing Marvel Ultimate Alliance co-op on any platform. But if a games popular, you can find players on any system.

Doesn't matter if you played a game before,i play games over and over not casually just move to the next one. To me there's no point in that or moneys worth especially in replayability. Even for the latest and greatest PC is way better,the games that are multiplatform look and play better on pc,also mods
and more. High ratings doesn't mean anything, gta iv is rated higher than galaxy,red dead ,reach and uncharted,does that mean gta iv is better than them? i'd take crysis,counter strike,starcraft 2,etc over those any day. Graphics is not subjective,you are saying that since it doesn't favor your opinion. mods aren't on consoles at all,closest is ut3 on ps3 and that is way limited to the pc counterpart. you admitted that a game needs to be popular to have a good amount playing. Not the case on pc....
Back to top Go down
Pickles
Chief Warrant Officer 4
Chief Warrant Officer 4
avatar

Posts : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-01

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:08 am

Spartan v07 wrote:
Invincible wrote:
Spartan v07 wrote:
Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.

1,000 dollars is all you need for a decent pc,yes it's a bit more than 3 consoles but it can do way more than all consoles combined. Also PC has way more games and better library than all combined. You can get games from the 90's till now. For consoles they are limited for that consoles life span. PC is way better for games,better graphics,mods,replayability for online games and much much more.

Any of the current gen consoles give you a great selection of games from the 80's till now. Either through backwards compatibility or download. Yes, you can get a lot of those games through emulation on PC, but it's not legal and you run the risk of getting a virus if you're not careful. I personally have little interest in games from when I was a kid. Been there, done that. I want the latest and greatest. And that's where consoles win.

"PC is way better for games"...can't play Mario Galaxy, Red Dead Redemption, Uncharted 2, and Halo Reach on PC. Some of the highest rated games this gen. I'd gladly trade those for StarCraft and WoW.

"better graphics"...totally subjective.

"mods" all current gen systems offer mods of some sort

"replayability for online games"... I'm not sure if anyone is still playing Marvel Ultimate Alliance co-op on any platform. But if a games popular, you can find players on any system.

Doesn't matter if you played a game before,i play games over and over not casually just move to the next one. To me there's no point in that or moneys worth especially in replayability. Even for the latest and greatest PC is way better,the games that are multiplatform look and play better on pc,also mods
and more. High ratings doesn't mean anything, gta iv is rated higher than galaxy,red dead ,reach and uncharted,does that mean gta iv is better than them? i'd take crysis,counter strike,starcraft 2,etc over those any day. Graphics is not subjective,you are saying that since it doesn't favor your opinion. mods aren't on consoles at all,closest is ut3 on ps3 and that is way limited to the pc counterpart. you admitted that a game needs to be popular to have a good amount playing. Not the case on pc....

Ugh.
Back to top Go down
Ihsahn
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class


Posts : 113
Join date : 2011-01-13
Location : TX

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:57 am

I know it's a bit of a necro so I apologize. Lengthy write-up, but it's 4AM here and I have insomnia, lol. Hi there, though. Kinda weird introduction to a forum with a wall of text, but hey!

Note that I own all the platforms and think all of them have their pros and cons.

Invincible wrote:
You can buy all 3 consoles for less then it would cost you to build or buy a good gaming PC. And you'll have a better selection of games to play too.

Consoles win.
This is untrue. I would recommend using newegg and tigerdirect and building your own PC. $400 will get you a bare minmum PC, where as 600-650ish will get you a nice computer. Very few games, if at all, require a ridiculous rig to run games at a stable framerate. My computer is over 3 years old and runs pretty much everything except Crysis on high and I spent around 800. And that was when these parts were new.

PC's do cost more. There is no question. While I like BBC, his argument wasn't very good with some points, but I do think he won overall. That said, you get what you pay for. A lot of you guys brag about how the 60 bucks is justified for your XBL subscription so the same goes with PCs: you get what you pay for. There is no doubt PC has the upperhand in controls, graphics, mods and lifespan for just about every game. Consoles provide a good alternative, but I think anyone neglecting themselves of platforms in general is silly. The Wii has excellent games like Super Mario Galaxy, the PS3 has Uncharted, Demons Souls, 360 has Halo etc. Every platform has something to offer, it's just that the PC objectively has more. Whether it fits your tastes is preference.

Stoney wrote:


Sorry for the double post, but you do have a better selection of games. Unless RTS genre is your favourite. No idea how that made you "facepalm"? Rolling Eyes
I hear this all the time. The PCs don't just have RTS'. We have dungeon crawlers, tower defense, MMOs, a lot more indie games and even a lot of the same titles the console guys have like FPS' and RPGs. To say one has a better selection of games like its a fact is just wrong.

Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.
Again, wrong. Yes, a $500 PC nowadays is a decent PC and won't make games look amazing, but the only people who spend "thousands" of dollars are misinformed consumers. Again, my PC is 3 years old without a single upgrade and I still run every game to date. Granted I don't play Crysis or Black Ops or whatever cause I think they suck, but you get my point.

Inferior selection of games? Oh please. Go look at the PC library and tell me how many more quality games it has. Just do it and you'll see how ignorant this is. Console-only gamers miss out on excellent titles like the Penumbra series, VVVVV, League of Legends, STALKER, Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Defense Grid, Trine, Killing Floor, WoW, Starcraft 2 etc. Not to mention older games like Diablo 2, Starcraft and Warcraft 3. I can play almost every game ever created for the PC still. Can you? These are just off the top of my head. There are plenty of games I could list, but I feel it'd be redundant. And what games we do share with you, we get the better versions of because of controls, mods and dedicated servers. Black Ops for consoles doesn't have dedicated servers now does it? Super Meat Boy for consoles isn't getting the level editor now is it?

The only reason YOU think the titles are inferior is because you fail to see past the overhyped and well-marketed games that the consoles get.



Quote :
Yeah you can get games from the 90's but how often do you want to play them because they really don't hold up well. Consoles are not just limited to its life span, the XBOX 360 at least has backwards compatibility with most of the XBOX titles. Whether the PC has a better library is highly debatable since there are not many developers who still make PC exclusives these days.
They don't hold up well? Starcraft and WC3 have been major e-sports for YEARS now. How do they not hold up well? Diablo 2 sold millions of copies and ten thousands upon thousands still play the game. People play HL2 ALL the time, as well as Unreal Tournament etc. Just because it's old doesn't mean anything. There aren't many MAINSTREAM developers that develop exclusively for the PC, but that doesn't make them bad games at all. You guys have been force-fed the idea that if the game isn't made by a major dev then it sucks. Blizzard still develops exclusively for the PC.

Quote :
Graphics- Depends how much you are willing to spend. I'd rather have the slightly inferior graphics of the consoles with the knowledge that when I get home, I am guaranteed to be able to play it
You're guaranteed to play it on the PC too. That's why you run benchmarks to see if your PC can run it. Nvidia released a thing on their website not too long ago that shows what games their GPUs can run. It's essentially try before you buy. PC's do cost more as an initial investment, but if you look at BBC's videos showing how much you save on games with Steam you'll save money in the long run, especially if you're an Xbox gamer because PC online gaming is FREE. Steam just finished its Christmas sale not too long ago and there were some killer deals. Hell, back in the summer you could buy the complete Square Enix/Eidos bundle for like 70 bucks and you saved FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS.

Quote :
Re-playability for online games- I don't see what you are getting at here. XBOX Live and PSN are both great online gaming services that offer plenty of replayability
And you have to PAY for Xbox Live. Cross-game voice chat? PC has had it for YEARS. Insane deals? Steam. Demos? We got it too. PCs have mods and dedicated servers, too, which extends lifespan and makes gaming better respectively.

Blackou7 wrote:
I understand what the other guy is trying to say. There are little things that can be complicated with PC gaming to the common person not savvy with computers. People just prefer to get home from a long day of work and pop in a game and play for 1 to 2 hours and be done.

Not everyone lives and breathes gaming and want to spend the money on a PC or even learn what they need to build one.

Personally I think PC gaming is great, had to ask a load of questions and do a lot of reading to some what understand the ins and outs on how to build a decent rig.
What you're saying is people are lazy. Just like BBC said. Seriously, building a PC is not hard. People don't like to mess with hardware because they're lazy. I come home from work every day and load up Steam and game away so that's not a good argument.

It takes common sense to game on a PC, not some tech geek. My friend was an outdoors-y guy for all his life and he had NO problem playing PC games. It's common sense, not rocket science. Do you need to learn? Yes. But it's superficial knowledge at best.

Quote :
Any of the current gen consoles give you a great selection of games from the 80's till now. Either through backwards compatibility or download. Yes, you can get a lot of those games through emulation on PC, but it's not legal and you run the risk of getting a virus if you're not careful. I personally have little interest in games from when I was a kid. Been there, done that. I want the latest and greatest. And that's where consoles win.
And this is the kind of mindset you've been fed. That only new games with a huge budget and a big name backing them are good. It's sad, really, that you're missing out on amazing titles because all you believe in is a big budget and a high review score. Hell, you should be MORE interested in older games 'cause their gameplay is more innovative than half the junk being spewed out of the industry today.

PS: it won't be long until PCs can emulate current gen consoles. We can already emulate the Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube, as well as the Wii. Don't gimme that virus crap. Common sense. Legality? Really? How much do you think a dev REALLY cares if you pirate an old game?

Quote :
"PC is way better for games"...can't play Mario Galaxy, Red Dead Redemption, Uncharted 2, and Halo Reach on PC. Some of the highest rated games this gen. I'd gladly trade those for StarCraft and WoW.
Go look at the games I listed above. You can't play any of those, either. This is where it pays off to have all the platforms, not a fanboy of one. You're not doing yourself a favor sticking to one platform (disregarding financial situations). Ever. EVER.

Quote :
"better graphics"...totally subjective.
No, no it's not. Familiarize yourself with the term anti-aliasing. Console games don't have it. A great PC not only runs games with AA, but at 60 FPS too. That right there defeats your argument. You get what you pay for and the guy you're quoting said better graphics, not whether you get better graphics out of a $300 console vs. a $300 pc.

Quote :
"mods" all current gen systems offer mods of some sort
No they don't. Can you play L4D mods? How about HL2? TF2? CoD4? WaW? Oblivion? No, you can't. You're just being a fanboy here.

Quote :
"replayability for online games"... I'm not sure if anyone is still playing Marvel Ultimate Alliance co-op on any platform. But if a games popular, you can find players on any system.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they shut down the Halo 2 servers and to a greater extent, original Xbox? PC games multiplayer can be supported for as long as they like because of dedicated servers. Counterstrike is still going strong and it's been out forever.

Also mods. Mods extend replayability.

I'm not here to troll or be some angry butthurt PC fanboy (because I'm not a fanboy). I own all the consoles and I own a great PC. I love all of them. They all have something to offer and they all have amazing games. SMG 2 is one of my favorite games ever and I fucking LOVE Uncharted 2. However, the PC is the best platform for gaming objectively. More quality games, mods, dedicated servers, graphics, controls, the deals from Steam etc. Whether it fits your taste is a totally different, but if you can afford the initial investment for a PC, it will pay off in the long run.













Back to top Go down
PureSexySound
Petty Officer 3rd Class
Petty Officer 3rd Class


Posts : 95
Join date : 2010-09-08

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:10 am

Someone give Ihsahn a medal.
You should write articles for websites dude..
XD
Back to top Go down
ghost23
Four Star General (Moderator)
Four Star General (Moderator)


Posts : 3425
Join date : 2009-12-16
Location : Australia

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:18 am

Ihsahn wrote:


Quote :
Graphics- Depends how much you are willing to spend. I'd rather have the slightly inferior graphics of the consoles with the knowledge that when I get home, I am guaranteed to be able to play it
You're guaranteed to play it on the PC too. That's why you run benchmarks to see if your PC can run it. Nvidia released a thing on their website not too long ago that shows what games their GPUs can run. It's essentially try before you buy. PC's do cost more as an initial investment, but if you look at BBC's videos showing how much you save on games with Steam you'll save money in the long run, especially if you're an Xbox gamer because PC online gaming is FREE. Steam just finished its Christmas sale not too long ago and there were some killer deals. Hell, back in the summer you could buy the complete Square Enix/Eidos bundle for like 70 bucks and you saved FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS.


Firstly I would like to welcome you to the forum, and thats definitely a hell of a way to introduce yourself.

But anyways, my reply.

One of the main reasons that I turned to console gaming was the simplistic convenience of it. What i was originally trying to say was that, as a mid-range PC gamer, you may not be able to play every game that comes out on store shelves. For me that is the biggest barrier to PC gaming. Personally, I'd much rather invest $300 for an XBOX 360/PS3 with the knowledge that I am guaranteed to be able to play anything that comes out for those systems for the next 5-10 years or however long the life cycle is going to be even if that means slightly inferior graphics.
I find that much more convenient than having to run GPU benchmarks, overclocking my CPU, going through those fucking crazy anti-piracy measures and at the end of the day, I still won't be able to run Crysis 2.
But that is just the situation that I am in, maybe you will be different and if PC gaming is easier for you than it is for me, by all means game on your PC and have fun, because thats what gaming is about at the end of the day.
Back to top Go down
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
Chief Petty Officer
Chief Petty Officer
avatar

Posts : 371
Join date : 2010-03-08
Age : 30
Location : Chernobyl NPP, Ukraine

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:31 am

I'm not getting involved in this whole debate because frankly I believe there are pro's and con's to both arguments.

However I heard on Kotaku that a guy called Tyler Smith, an Albertan Morrowind fan has released a collection of several graphical modifications for "The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind" as one big pack, which is gaining some buzz around the community.

This game is 9 years old now yet it's still been improved.

Here's a video of the graphical modifications.

Back to top Go down
Ihsahn
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class


Posts : 113
Join date : 2011-01-13
Location : TX

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:27 pm

PureSexySound wrote:
Someone give Ihsahn a medal.
You should write articles for websites dude..
XD
Haha, thanks I guess. I've just learned how ignorant fanboyism is and how much more it pays off to play all the systems. I wouldn't be where I was at today with gaming without the original Halo and I wouldn't be enjoying games today if it weren't for titles like SMG 2 and Uncharted 2. I used to game only on the original Xbox, but I found out how many awesome titles were on the PC and only this past summer did I have the cash to afford a Wii and a PS3.

ghost23 wrote:
One of the main reasons that I turned to console gaming was the simplistic convenience of it. What i was originally trying to say was that, as a mid-range PC gamer, you may not be able to play every game that comes out on store shelves. For me that is the biggest barrier to PC gaming. Personally, I'd much rather invest $300 for an XBOX 360/PS3 with the knowledge that I am guaranteed to be able to play anything that comes out for those systems for the next 5-10 years or however long the life cycle is going to be even if that means slightly inferior graphics.
I find that much more convenient than having to run GPU benchmarks, overclocking my CPU, going through those fucking crazy anti-piracy measures and at the end of the day, I still won't be able to run Crysis 2.
But that is just the situation that I am in, maybe you will be different and if PC gaming is easier for you than it is for me, by all means game on your PC and have fun, because thats what gaming is about at the end of the day.
I think you're over exaggerating the convenience part of it. I built my PC and I've done nothing to the hardware in 3 years and it still runs fine. That said I understand the finance part. BBC is cool and all, but he's completely wrong when he says that a 500 dollar computer will run all of today's games at a decent framerate (that or I'm missing something he isn't). I certainly wouldn't settle for playing at 15 FPS; I'd just rather get a console. That said money isn't as much of an issue for me as it is other people so I shelled out for everything and enjoy my PC the most.

Though I'll admit the PC's controls are inferior for Super Meat Boy, but I just hook my PS3 controller up to my PC to play it.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. wrote:
I'm not getting involved in this whole debate because frankly I believe there are pro's and con's to both arguments.

However I heard on Kotaku that a guy called Tyler Smith, an Albertan Morrowind fan has released a collection of several graphical modifications for "The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind" as one big pack, which is gaining some buzz around the community.

This game is 9 years old now yet it's still been improved.

Here's a video of the graphical modifications.

Yeah that mod has been around for a while I believe. I think the core thingy for that package is something called Morrowind Graphics Extender or something, but it's definitely one of the reasons why PC's are awesome. Morrowind is a great game, but aged horribly with graphics.

Well, that and it has terrible combat, lol, but that's fixed with other mods.

Thanks for the welcome, ghost. I'm gonna try to find that image that /g/ made that shows gaming computers in price ranges.
Back to top Go down
Ihsahn
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class


Posts : 113
Join date : 2011-01-13
Location : TX

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:13 pm

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/7691/pcguide.png

Here it is if anyone is interested. It's a big pic so I don't wanna embed it.
Back to top Go down
Pickles
Chief Warrant Officer 4
Chief Warrant Officer 4
avatar

Posts : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-01

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:42 pm

Ihsahn wrote:
I know it's a bit of a necro so I apologize. Lengthy write-up, but it's 4AM here and I have insomnia, lol. Hi there, though. Kinda weird introduction to a forum with a wall of text, but hey!

Note that I own all the platforms and think all of them have their pros and cons.

Invincible wrote:
You can buy all 3 consoles for less then it would cost you to build or buy a good gaming PC. And you'll have a better selection of games to play too.

Consoles win.
This is untrue. I would recommend using newegg and tigerdirect and building your own PC. $400 will get you a bare minmum PC, where as 600-650ish will get you a nice computer. Very few games, if at all, require a ridiculous rig to run games at a stable framerate. My computer is over 3 years old and runs pretty much everything except Crysis on high and I spent around 800. And that was when these parts were new.

PC's do cost more. There is no question. While I like BBC, his argument wasn't very good with some points, but I do think he won overall. That said, you get what you pay for. A lot of you guys brag about how the 60 bucks is justified for your XBL subscription so the same goes with PCs: you get what you pay for. There is no doubt PC has the upperhand in controls, graphics, mods and lifespan for just about every game. Consoles provide a good alternative, but I think anyone neglecting themselves of platforms in general is silly. The Wii has excellent games like Super Mario Galaxy, the PS3 has Uncharted, Demons Souls, 360 has Halo etc. Every platform has something to offer, it's just that the PC objectively has more. Whether it fits your tastes is preference.

Most people don't have the time or money to use all platforms.

Stoney wrote:


Sorry for the double post, but you do have a better selection of games. Unless RTS genre is your favourite. No idea how that made you "facepalm"? Rolling Eyes
I hear this all the time. The PCs don't just have RTS'. We have dungeon crawlers, tower defense, MMOs, a lot more indie games and even a lot of the same titles the console guys have like FPS' and RPGs. To say one has a better selection of games like its a fact is just wrong.

Pretty much subjective.

Invincible wrote:
It always amuses me when I hear people say they can build their own gaming PC for $500. Sure you can, but, for that price, it's not going to make games look any better then they already do on PS3 or 360. And even if you do spend thousands on a state of the art PC, you'll still be stuck with an inferior selection of games compared to console owners.
Again, wrong. Yes, a $500 PC nowadays is a decent PC and won't make games look amazing, but the only people who spend "thousands" of dollars are misinformed consumers. Again, my PC is 3 years old without a single upgrade and I still run every game to date. Granted I don't play Crysis or Black Ops or whatever cause I think they suck, but you get my point.

Inferior selection of games? Oh please. Go look at the PC library and tell me how many more quality games it has. Just do it and you'll see how ignorant this is. Console-only gamers miss out on excellent titles like the Penumbra series, VVVVV, League of Legends, STALKER, Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Defense Grid, Trine, Killing Floor, WoW, Starcraft 2 etc. Not to mention older games like Diablo 2, Starcraft and Warcraft 3. I can play almost every game ever created for the PC still. Can you? These are just off the top of my head. There are plenty of games I could list, but I feel it'd be redundant. And what games we do share with you, we get the better versions of because of controls, mods and dedicated servers. Black Ops for consoles doesn't have dedicated servers now does it? Super Meat Boy for consoles isn't getting the level editor now is it?

The only reason YOU think the titles are inferior is because you fail to see past the overhyped and well-marketed games that the consoles get.

That is just preference and that is good.


Quote :
Yeah you can get games from the 90's but how often do you want to play them because they really don't hold up well. Consoles are not just limited to its life span, the XBOX 360 at least has backwards compatibility with most of the XBOX titles. Whether the PC has a better library is highly debatable since there are not many developers who still make PC exclusives these days.
They don't hold up well? Starcraft and WC3 have been major e-sports for YEARS now. How do they not hold up well? Diablo 2 sold millions of copies and ten thousands upon thousands still play the game. People play HL2 ALL the time, as well as Unreal Tournament etc. Just because it's old doesn't mean anything. There aren't many MAINSTREAM developers that develop exclusively for the PC, but that doesn't make them bad games at all. You guys have been force-fed the idea that if the game isn't made by a major dev then it sucks. Blizzard still develops exclusively for the PC.

Haha, no. That pretty much goes up against the popularity of arcade and indie games on the consoles.

Quote :
Graphics- Depends how much you are willing to spend. I'd rather have the slightly inferior graphics of the consoles with the knowledge that when I get home, I am guaranteed to be able to play it
You're guaranteed to play it on the PC too. That's why you run benchmarks to see if your PC can run it. Nvidia released a thing on their website not too long ago that shows what games their GPUs can run. It's essentially try before you buy. PC's do cost more as an initial investment, but if you look at BBC's videos showing how much you save on games with Steam you'll save money in the long run, especially if you're an Xbox gamer because PC online gaming is FREE. Steam just finished its Christmas sale not too long ago and there were some killer deals. Hell, back in the summer you could buy the complete Square Enix/Eidos bundle for like 70 bucks and you saved FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS.
"That's why you run benchmarks to see if your PC can run it."

Quote :
Re-playability for online games- I don't see what you are getting at here. XBOX Live and PSN are both great online gaming services that offer plenty of replayability
And you have to PAY for Xbox Live. Cross-game voice chat? PC has had it for YEARS. Insane deals? Steam. Demos? We got it too. PCs have mods and dedicated servers, too, which extends lifespan and makes gaming better respectively.

Again with the subjective. Whether you think PC gaming online is better is entirely up to preference. Both have pros and cons. Right now, ALL xbox indie games have a demo. Not so with PC indie games on steam.

Blackou7 wrote:
I understand what the other guy is trying to say. There are little things that can be complicated with PC gaming to the common person not savvy with computers. People just prefer to get home from a long day of work and pop in a game and play for 1 to 2 hours and be done.

Not everyone lives and breathes gaming and want to spend the money on a PC or even learn what they need to build one.

Personally I think PC gaming is great, had to ask a load of questions and do a lot of reading to some what understand the ins and outs on how to build a decent rig.
What you're saying is people are lazy. Just like BBC said. Seriously, building a PC is not hard. People don't like to mess with hardware because they're lazy. I come home from work every day and load up Steam and game away so that's not a good argument.

It takes common sense to game on a PC, not some tech geek. My friend was an outdoors-y guy for all his life and he had NO problem playing PC games. It's common sense, not rocket science. Do you need to learn? Yes. But it's superficial knowledge at best.

People aren't lazy.They are busy. They shouldn't be expected to be know how to mess with hardware or shit like that. They don't teach that stuff in school and they're probably too busy to learn anyways.

Quote :
Any of the current gen consoles give you a great selection of games from the 80's till now. Either through backwards compatibility or download. Yes, you can get a lot of those games through emulation on PC, but it's not legal and you run the risk of getting a virus if you're not careful. I personally have little interest in games from when I was a kid. Been there, done that. I want the latest and greatest. And that's where consoles win.
And this is the kind of mindset you've been fed. That only new games with a huge budget and a big name backing them are good. It's sad, really, that you're missing out on amazing titles because all you believe in is a big budget and a high review score. Hell, you should be MORE interested in older games 'cause their gameplay is more innovative than half the junk being spewed out of the industry today.

PS: it won't be long until PCs can emulate current gen consoles. We can already emulate the Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube, as well as the Wii. Don't gimme that virus crap. Common sense. Legality? Really? How much do you think a dev REALLY cares if you pirate an old game?

He just said that consoles "give you a great selection of games form the 80's till now". So you're contradicting yourself when you say he isn't interested in older games. Also I have to repeat myself but arcade and indie games are very popular on the consoles.

Emulation is illegal no matter how you put it. You are BREAKING the law.


Quote :
"PC is way better for games"...can't play Mario Galaxy, Red Dead Redemption, Uncharted 2, and Halo Reach on PC. Some of the highest rated games this gen. I'd gladly trade those for StarCraft and WoW.
Go look at the games I listed above. You can't play any of those, either. This is where it pays off to have all the platforms, not a fanboy of one. You're not doing yourself a favor sticking to one platform (disregarding financial situations). Ever. EVER.

Each of the 3 consoles has enough to satisfy the person who buys it. Except maybe the PC, which is why so many PC gamers have at least one console.

Quote :
"better graphics"...totally subjective.
No, no it's not. Familiarize yourself with the term anti-aliasing. Console games don't have it. A great PC not only runs games with AA, but at 60 FPS too. That right there defeats your argument. You get what you pay for and the guy you're quoting said better graphics, not whether you get better graphics out of a $300 console vs. a $300 pc.

From Pics that I've seen, the differences between console graphics and PC graphics are minimal at best.

Quote :
"mods" all current gen systems offer mods of some sort
No they don't. Can you play L4D mods? How about HL2? TF2? CoD4? WaW? Oblivion? No, you can't. You're just being a fanboy here.

Consoles are capable of mods, there just isn't a huge demand for it.

Quite frankly, the mods for L4D were pretty underwhelming.


Quote :
"replayability for online games"... I'm not sure if anyone is still playing Marvel Ultimate Alliance co-op on any platform. But if a games popular, you can find players on any system.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they shut down the Halo 2 servers and to a greater extent, original Xbox? PC games multiplayer can be supported for as long as they like because of dedicated servers. Counterstrike is still going strong and it's been out forever.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I can't seem to play Outlaws, one of my favorite PC games, online anymore.

Also mods. Mods extend replayability.

I'm not here to troll or be some angry butthurt PC fanboy (because I'm not a fanboy). I own all the consoles and I own a great PC. I love all of them. They all have something to offer and they all have amazing games. SMG 2 is one of my favorite games ever and I fucking LOVE Uncharted 2. However, the PC is the best platform for gaming objectively. More quality games, mods, dedicated servers, graphics, controls, the deals from Steam etc. Whether it fits your taste is a totally different, but if you can afford the initial investment for a PC, it will pay off in the long run.













Back to top Go down
Ihsahn
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class


Posts : 113
Join date : 2011-01-13
Location : TX

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:21 pm

Pickles wrote:

Most people don't have the time or money to use all platforms.
That's right. And I believe, if you read my entire post, that I clearly stated this. However, that doesn't mean you have to be a fanboy. I owned only an Xbox back in the day, but while I couldn't afford everything else, I wasn't neglecting and being ignorant about other platforms.

Quote :
Pretty much subjective.
I'm not sure you understand what subjective means. There was no subjectivity in that. The PC has tons of games from all different kinds of genres. Genres consoles will never see on a wide scale.

Quote :
That is just preference and that is good.
You're straw manning my argument here and in the latter part of your response.

The PC has more games AND more quality games. Whether you like them is totally different and that's not what I've been addressing. I've been addressing the fact that there are more higher rated games on the PC (and more in general) than there are on the consoles. That's not an opinion, preference or subjectivity. That's the truth. There are over 90 (roughly 99ish) triple A games on the PC and that's just counting triple A.

Quote :
Haha, no. That pretty much goes up against the popularity of arcade and indie games on the consoles.
So explain why people use the argument "there aren't a lot of PC exclusive developers" when there's tons of them? They just don't have big flashy names like Blizzard and Bungie. Even if there were none, we get the better version generally. The 360 doesn't have a lot of retail exclusives either, my friend.

Quote :
"That's why you run benchmarks to see if your PC can run it."
You don't buy games before you look at their requirements so you know you're gonna be able to play them when you get home, lol. You don't understand the point I'm making here.

Quote :
Again with the subjective. Whether you think PC gaming online is better is entirely up to preference. Both have pros and cons. Right now, ALL xbox indie games have a demo. Not so with PC indie games on steam.
Er - no. You're a delusional fanboy if you think the consoles have a better online experience because we get everything you guys get + more for FREE. That's factual evidence, not an opinion. Between the consoles who has the better online is pretty subjective, but when you throw in the PC there is no question what's better. We get what you guys get plus more (mods, dedicated servers etc). The quality of online PC gaming is factually better.

Quote :
People aren't lazy.They are busy. They shouldn't be expected to be know how to mess with hardware or shit like that. They don't teach that stuff in school and they're probably too busy to learn anyways.
No, people are lazy. Learning how to build a computer takes a quick Google search. The information you need to know is what part is what and... well, that's about it. That's laziness, not busy. You can use video tutorials and do it side-by-side with the tutorial. Have you seen how long it takes to build a PC? Not long at all. It's overexaggerated how much people need to know to game on the PC.

Yes, you do have to learn, but that's a sorry and lame excuse. A really lame excuse. It's complete and utter laziness. People see things like gigabyte, processor and GPU and think "DURR TECH GEEK TOO HARD" when it isn't hard at all. But for the sake of argument if you think it IS too hard then buy the parts and take it to a store. They'll take your parts and build it for you for a small fee.

Quote :
He just said that consoles "give you a great selection of games form the 80's till now". So you're contradicting yourself when you say he isn't interested in older games. Also I have to repeat myself but arcade and indie games are very popular on the consoles.

Emulation is illegal no matter how you put it. You are BREAKING the law.
Actually, no, I'm not contradicting myself. Read his post again. He clearly stated he has no interest in older games because he's "been there, done that." That's the whole reason I brought up that argument.

Emulation is illegal, but are you seriously going to tell me you've never broken the law? I guarantee you break the law all the time you just don't know it. Hear me out: I don't support emulation because devs need the money, but emulating a game is no different than buying a used game in terms of profit that goes to the dev (and don't tell me you want to support a big, greedy and terrible corporation like Gamestop). That said, the option is still there. I lost the AV cable for my Dreamcast, but I can emulate the great games from that console thanks to my PC.

Quote :
Each of the 3 consoles has enough to satisfy the person who buys it. Except maybe the PC, which is why so many PC gamers have at least one console.
Sorry, but this fact comes from where? Can you prove this? I can tell you right now that the Xbox did not satisfy me one bit so your argument is invalidated right there. Especially the 360. That's the whole reason I upgraded my PC and bought a Wii & PS3. When you have all the platforms you can play every game.

Quote :
From Pics that I've seen, the differences between console graphics and PC graphics are minimal at best.
Anti-aliasing makes a huge difference. Ever notice the jagged edges around things in console games? With anti-aliasing, those go away. Not to mention consoles don't play at 60 FPS. Oh, and PC's have 1080p where as consoles only have upscaled 720. I can go on all day about how the PC is better from a technical perspective.

Quote :
Consoles are capable of mods, there just isn't a huge demand for it.
Er - can you prove this? You don't get mods because consoles can't script and it's MUCH easier to design a level on a PC than it s a console.

Quote :
Quite frankly, the mods for L4D were pretty underwhelming.
For someone arguing about my arguments being subjective this is a totally subjective thing to say. Hell, sometimes mods are better than the actual game itself (see Warcraft 3) or enhance the game entirely (Morrowind).

Quote :
Correct me if I'm wrong but I can't seem to play Outlaws, one of my favorite PC games, online anymore.
http://webpages.charter.net/molycoat/

This says you're wrong. I know nothing of the game, but if multiplayer maps are still being developed, you can play it. The only time games die is because a) no dedicated server support or b) it was a bad game to begin with.

My point has been clear from the start: the PC's objective gaming experience IS better. We have more quality games, better deals, sometimes free DLC that you don't get (isn't L4D's DLC free on the PC but not on the Xbox?), mods, controls, dedicated servers and so on and so forth. The biggest problem with PC gaming is the price. If you're so obsessed with the low exclusive count on the 360 or whatever then I can't change your mind, but from an objective standpoint, the PC wins hands down. It just becomes a matter of price and what platform has more games for you, which I never argued against. I've been arguing the objectivity of it only because if a console has the games you want then there's no convincing. Believe it or not, that's why I have all the consoles. I can't get everything on the PC and I totally accept it. But I also realize that consoles don't have PC exclusives either. And thus why I own all the platforms.

You're just arguing for the sake of it.


Last edited by Ihsahn on Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:03 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top Go down
PureSexySound
Petty Officer 3rd Class
Petty Officer 3rd Class


Posts : 95
Join date : 2010-09-08

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:33 pm

Ihsahn.. I have went out to buy an extremely over priced hat..
I now take it off to you Very Happy
Back to top Go down
Ihsahn
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Petty Officer 2nd Class


Posts : 113
Join date : 2011-01-13
Location : TX

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:45 pm

Is it a top hat?
Back to top Go down
Stoney
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
avatar

Posts : 2812
Join date : 2009-11-03
Age : 28
Location : In the gutter

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:19 am

Not everyone likes or wants to game on PC how bout we leave it at that? Smile
Back to top Go down
PureSexySound
Petty Officer 3rd Class
Petty Officer 3rd Class


Posts : 95
Join date : 2010-09-08

PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   Fri Jan 14, 2011 7:57 pm

Why yes.. Yes it is..
;D
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC   

Back to top Go down
 
PC vs Console Debate - ReviewTechUSA vs BBC
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» PC Gaming V.S. Console Gaming
» New day, new topic: PC vs Console
» Diablo 3 Console
» RUMOR: Gamecube games on the Wii U Virtual Console?
» which console would you pick?

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
 :: General Xbox360 Discussion :: 360 vs PS3-
Jump to: