I Don't Like Consoles

B00MSTICK

Good thread lads, gave me something to read at least.

First off, unlike the OP I dont hate consoles.
Ive owned the NES,SNES,Sega Megadrive,PS1,N64,PS2

Up until the release of Starcraft + Half life I would have considered myself a console gamer (although the original C&C and RA were played a bit too) Of course these games on release offered an amazing online expierience without any competition from consoles.

I now have 3 pcs varying in spec and size.The laptop (which was bought for €1k over a year ago) can somehow play new PC games fairly well aswell as choice console games such as Mario Kart 64,Tekken 3,MGS,Pro Evo 6 aswell as PC ones like Oblivion etc with ease.Throw in 2 x ps2 - usb adapters and you have a pretty decent, relatively mobile console. I just like the fact that i can have RE1,2,3,C:V all there ready to go too. Is this possible on an X360? Seriously, I actually want to know!

Someone mentioned Zelda TP wouldnt play on the PC?It came out on the NGC right? Who knows maybe it will work on gecko or dolphin eventually? Now I know very little about coding or emulation or porting but if a small group of part-time,unpaid programmers with a constantly changing roster can get PS2 games running at playable speeds and even PS1 games going on Pocket PCs who knows what a full time,dedicated team of them could do?

Krazy 8s (i think) said consoles are becoming more like PCs, which i agree with and if a console was released that offered all the gaming functions/features a PC can then Id buy one in an instant.

Wiki says a console is a computer whose sole purpose is for playing video games, so does that mean these new game playing,internet surfing,media centreing machines arent consoles anymore? If i took the screen off my laptop would that classify it as a console?Or does the fact that it has a word processor make it a PC? Hmm wonder if someone should make a console something like that. No need for a screen, save a few quid there. Doesnt have to be quite so small. No need for the integrated k/b or touchpad.Most consoles sell at a loss,right? Im sure they could somehow create some sort of motion detection thing too? Someone played Hl2 using one with varying degrees of success, lets say they can.

So for around 800 quid (yes this is guesstimating to the extreme) you could have a console (or is it a pc?) which could play your gears of war,company of heroes,obscure japanese RPGs,revolutionary Wii-esque games aswell as have the mods,updates,customizations,free games,tweaking etc

Will never happen though will it?

Meh, ill stick with my PC capable of playing this years PC games aswell as pretty much all the previous gens console games too.For the moment anyway.

EMULATION IS WRONG.DO NOT DOWNLOAD OR USE ANY EMULATORS EVEN WHEN YOU OWN THE ORIGINAL CONSOLES AND/OR GAMES.THE ABOVE POST WAS BASED ON THE OPINIONS/EXPIERIENCES OF A NON-EXISTANT PERSON.

rainbow kirby

I see the benefits of having both, actually. I can enjoy playing, say, Okami or We Love Katamari on my PS2 or Zelda: TP on my Wii just as much as I'd enjoy playing WoW on my PC... it's just that certain genres in my opinion work better on PC than they do on consoles and vice versa.

Sand

I used to own a few consoles and enjoyed them, but I've never looked back since I bought my first PC. I've never seen a game for a console that made me look twice. Gears of War? After all the hype I tracked down gameplay footage and wasnt impressed - the graphics which were hyped up were good but not revolutionary, certainly not compared to PC titles. Gameplay was....hmmmm.

Sure, if I was EA Id abandon PC gaming and pump development money into consoles and mass manufacture golf games with yearly updates/celebrity endorsements for as long as people kept buying them. Easy money.

As a gamer I prefer a wide and diverse field of games - and where games are limited I love being able to download a mod that can completely revitalise an old game and make it fresh. The Total Realism mods for Rome:TW were fantastic, and highlighted the way the advantage of being able to take a developers release and enhance it. I liked being able to get free, quality mods & plugins for games like Oblivion, without being charged for it. I like being able to find quality, small budget games like Take Command: 2nd Mannasses that simply would be laughed out of EAs office.

In terms of technology, user generated content, complexity [I like games that have a little more going on under the hood tbh, gaming that doesnt run out of surprises or tricks after 3 hours play is not a bad thing] and the games available and in development the PC offer more. I like that my PC can handle gaming from EVE Online, to Day of Defeat to Civillisation 4 to Total War to Galactic Civillisations. I like that I can dig out old classics like Baldurs Gate or Alpha Centauri, even System Shock 2. PCs have an immense library of games. When consoles can offer games of a similar calibre then I'll have to consider buying one. Until then PCs are far and away the best gaming machines around. Sports/Fighting games arent an issue - plug in a controller and youre set.

Sure PC gaming is more expensive than buying a console [mind you with consoles now a good few hundred, games 50 or 60, controllers, memory cards and whatever other peripherals console gaming isnt exactly bargain hunters either] but you can get a great PC for 2000 Euro. Over two years thats 3 Euro a day, and you can extend its useful life by upgrading memory, graphics cards or even something as simple as drivers before you have to consider buying a new one. Not a hell of a lot for quality gaming really, especially when you consider plenty of people will be buying each console thats out there. You wont even have to update that often when you consider quite a few games will also be released on console and thus not exactly demanding.

If you have a console with a keyboard and mouse of some sort then these games will be a lot easier to play on consoles, but it's only a matter of time.

It still bemuses me why these arent practically standard. Do they get a good laugh from thinking about people playing FPS on gamepads or something? God love the poor SOBs trying to play Bioshock with one - and weep for the compromises the designers will have made to try and make it viable.

I find trying to perfect combos in ikaruga or finding out how to avoid a nasty bosses attack pattern far more cerebrally challenging than knowing my expensive axe of smiting is more than a match for a troll thingy. I've often found that a difficult boss can be beaten after I've had a long think about it on the way home from college rather than hours of replay.

Yeah, there was a trick to combat in Gothic 2 - it was counter intuitive, but once you got it you could quickly learn how to fight various opponents and timing your blows and blocks, how to move and read foes. It was the same basic operation and so long as you timed it right you were effectively untouchable. The PC offers the "timing/twitch" challenge, but it also offers more.

I got more cerberal challenge from very *old* games like BG1 and BG2, where with planning and tactics -and timing - you could beat opponents far, far stronger than you. Those games are from the late/mid 90s and the sheer scope of gameplay/tactics offered is still unchallenged by anything I've seen on consoles. *And* theres the mandatory "expensive axe of smiting" too.

0ubliette

krazy_8s wrote:

The pc is and always will be 'everything on the menu' because it is capable of being everything on the menu.

IN THEORY yes it can play any game known to mankind from the atari 2600 to the xbox 360, no doubt. In PRACTICE, it can only play PC games and emulated console games, if you want to get technical. In THEORY its everyting on the menu, in REAL LIFE its not. Unless you want to fire up fraps and get some screenshots of Okami running on a PC, then thats the end of the argument. If you want to sample everything on the gamin menu, then yes, you need to own a console as a pc alone wont cut it. I own a high end PC, i also own a GC, ps1, ps2, xbox, xbox360, dreamcast, SNES..etc etc. The OP himeself said he doesnt own any consoles, so how is he even qualified to say the pc is better without even playing them?

Khalim

I love this thread.

I prefer pc gaming to console gaming. An example that I will be using is the Sims.

The Sims on pc has access to all user made mods and contents, whilst the console offers different gameplay modes but suffers from lack of additional user made mods. Each has their strengths and weaknesses.

The PC allows for greater creativity and additional content, moddability if you will.

But I just want a Monkey Butler on the PC version of the Sims. Why is it only available on the consoles? WHY? WHY? Everybody knows monkeys rule!

TheAlmightyArse

0ubliette wrote:

IN THEORY yes it can play any game known to mankind from the atari 2600 to the xbox 360, no doubt. In PRACTICE, it can only play PC games and emulated console games, if you want to get technical. In THEORY its everyting on the menu, in REAL LIFE its not.

Exactly the point. Arguing that the PC could be the ultimate games machine is entirely pointless when consoles have gained such popularity and such a presence that they're in a position to offer the widest and cheapest choice, while the PC games market has dug itself into such a rut that this is very unlikely to change.

Cuddlesworth

0ubliette wrote:

IN THEORY yes it can play any game known to mankind from the atari 2600 to the xbox 360, no doubt. In PRACTICE, it can only play PC games and emulated console games, if you want to get technical. In THEORY its everyting on the menu, in REAL LIFE its not.

In real life it is, emulators for the ps2 and x-box are ticking along nicely with no money or support from the games company's. How hard do you think it would be for Sony or Microsoft to design a ps3/x-box 360 emulator? In theory the pc can play these games and if the support was there in real life too. On the other hand, some games would be next to impossible to bring out on the consoles.

0ubliette wrote:

Unless you want to fire up fraps and get some screenshots of Okami running on a PC, then thats the end of the argument. If you want to sample everything on the gamin menu, then yes, you need to own a console as a pc alone wont cut it.

I would like to sample everything on the menu, but I don't have wads of cash to blow on a multiple selection of crap consoles. So I spend my money on something better, a pc.

0ubliette wrote:

I own a high end PC, i also own a GC, ps1, ps2, xbox, xbox360, dreamcast, SNES..etc etc.

Think of all the money you have wasted. Not only for the **** games ont he consoles with quality control, but on controllers, memory cards, the consoles themselves, expansion slots.....

0ubliette wrote:

The OP himeself said he doesnt own any consoles, so how is he even qualified to say the pc is better without even playing them?

How likely do you think it really is that he has never played any of the above consoles. Really? Friends, family and bloody game stores? He never said he didn't play them, he said he didnt own them.

I don't own any consoles, but amazingly I have a ps2, n64, snes, megadrive, x-box360, Nes and a vast selection of games in my house. Have I played any of them?

uberpixie

krazy_8s wrote:

I would like to sample everything on the menu, but I don't have wads of cash to blow on a multiple selection of crap consoles. So I spend my money on something better, a pc.

Think of all the money you have wasted. Not only for the **** games ont he consoles with quality control, but on controllers, memory cards, the consoles themselves, expansion slots.....

As a friend once said to me "I enjoyed that, I have had my fun, that is all that matters, I don't care if you don't agree with me"

That is how this entire thread should be treated.

The PC and consoles offer two very different gaming experiences and there is more than enough room on the market for both. It's all good.

Regarding quailty control, no matter what platform you choose: there is always far more gack games than fantastic ones.

Personally I am primarily a PC gamer, but I do like to play consoles and some of the best games I have ever played have been on consoles.

I can see the argument from both sides, I understand blowing a huge amount of money on a PC (i intend to in 6 months:D), just as I understand why someone would think it was a huge waste of money and would would 2 consoles instead and a huge number of games and have an absolute blast for months for the same price.

As long as you enjoy the games you are playing and they are fantastic: who cares what platform they are on?

Once the games are good a console/PC is not a waste of money:D.

TheAlmightyArse

krazy_8s wrote:

In real life it is, emulators for the ps2 and x-box are ticking along nicely with no money or support from the games company's.

In real life, YOU ARE MAKING THINGS UP. The best PSone emus are a bit dicky, and getting a PS2 or XBox game running on a PC requires some serious hardware. Hardware which would cost way more than buying both those consoles (and being able to play any game designed for them perfectly). The €700 PC I bought last year can't run N64 games properly. Games consoles are, by definition, machines specifically designed to run games. So cost-for-cost, they do it far better than PCs, which are multi-purpose machines.

krazy_8s wrote:

How hard do you think it would be for Sony or Microsoft to design a ps3/x-box 360 emulator?

Quite hard. See: Sony's PS2 emulator in the PS3, or Microsofts XBox one in the XBox 360.

krazy_8s wrote:

I would like to sample everything on the menu, but I don't have wads of cash to blow on a multiple selection of crap consoles. So I spend my money on something better, a pc.

Again, your facts are just wrong. Buying a PS2 AND an XBox AND a Gamecube would be cheaper than buying a gaming PC with the same longevity. You could throw in a DS Lite and a PSP for the price, too.

krazy_8s wrote:

Think of all the money you have wasted. Not only for the **** games ont he consoles with quality control, but on controllers, memory cards, the consoles themselves, expansion slots.....

For that argument to work, you'd have to say that PC controllers don't cost money; nor does upgrading the PC or the PC itself. And what the hell are you talking about quality control for? When I buy a game for my console, it will work. Perfectly. Buying a game for my PC is much more of a gamble. And by "expansion slots", do you mean the (nearly entirely optional) RAM expanison on the N64? Because I can't think of a single other example of this ever happening.

0ubliette

krazy_8s wrote:

In real life it is, emulators for the ps2 and x-box are ticking along nicely with no money or support from the games company's.

As almighty arse said, this is pure fantasy. Ive ran DC emus, PS1 emus, and a few others, the results are spotty at best.

krazy_8s wrote:

I would like to sample everything on the menu, but I don't have wads of cash to blow on a multiple selection of crap consoles. So I spend my money on something better, a pc.

Crap in your opinion, maybe.

krazy_8s wrote:

Think of all the money you have wasted. Not only for the **** games ont he consoles with quality control, but on controllers, memory cards, the consoles themselves, expansion slots.....

OR, you could think of it as being that i have played, completed and loved, some of the greatest games of the last 2 generations and the current gen, Soul Calibur, Shenmue, Res evil, Super mario sunshine, Metroid, Zelda, MGS, Okami, Dead rising, Tekken, Ninja gaiden, Crackdown, Street fighter, the list could go on all night. As a hobby id say youve spent just as much building pcs in the same amount of time.

krazy_8s wrote:

I don't own any consoles, but amazingly I have a ps2, n64, snes, megadrive, x-box360, Nes and a vast selection of games in my house. Have I played any of them?

If you havent, then all i can say is good luck to ya chum.........p

Cuddlesworth

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

In real life, YOU ARE MAKING THINGS UP. The best PSone emus are a bit dicky, and getting a PS2 or XBox game running on a PC requires some serious hardware. Hardware which would cost way more than buying both those consoles (and being able to play any game designed for them perfectly). The €700 PC I bought last year can't run N64 games properly. Games consoles are, by definition, machines specifically designed to run games. So cost-for-cost, they do it far better than PCs, which are multi-purpose machines.

0ubliette wrote:

As almighty arse said, this is pure fantasy. Ive ran DC emus, PS1 emus, and a few others, the results are spotty at best.

I said that pc's were capable of running emulators for these consoles, not that emulators that are home brewed work perfectly on them. That being said, I have got some ps2 and x-box emulators working on them with certain games. From the looks of things, microsoft and sony don't seem to be doing much better on consoles designed to be backwards compatible. And yet small projects with no backing are having moderate success on pc's. Which brings us back to the point of money being wasted on consoles.

As for the cost of buying a good pc, with proper selection of parts I maintain a extremely good pc for around 400-500 quid a year. I choose what parts I buy for longevity and sell the old ones. The problem is buying the whole lot at the start outright, which is quite expensive.

Both the xbox360 and ps3 use gfx chips that are essentially mid range pc gfx cards. and the cpus are so bloody close to pc chips now its amazing.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Again, your facts are just wrong. Buying a PS2 AND an XBox AND a Gamecube would be cheaper than buying a gaming PC with the same longevity. You could throw in a DS Lite and a PSP for the price, too.

Buying a ps2 when it came out, x-box when it was released and Gamecube as well including controllers and accessories(dvd remote anyone) would cost a hell of a lot more then a good pc. Saying they are cheap now is like saying a old pc is cheap. Hardware moves on, consoles don't. At least with pc's the re-sale value is still considerable. Gaming pc with support(ie games released on pc as well) would mean that 4 controllers(maybe 8 or 10 since there would not have to be a set limit) would be the only ones you would need for years.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

For that argument to work, you'd have to say that PC controllers don't cost money; nor does upgrading the PC or the PC itself. And what the hell are you talking about quality control for? When I buy a game for my console, it will work. Perfectly. Buying a game for my PC is much more of a gamble.

I have hit many bugs in games for consoles. Graphical glitches, un-foreseen advantages in multilayer(goldeneye, cursor targets through wall).They cant be patched. and the consoles that can have this funny thing of just not working again. Google ring of death/xbox360.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

And by "expansion slots", do you mean the (nearly entirely optional) RAM expanison on the N64? Because I can't think of a single other example of this ever happening.

The cd drive for the mega drive, the ill fabled similar drive the the n64 that never came out. Tape drives for the commandor. The dvd remote needed for the x-box. The tiny memory cards needed for consoles sold at horrendous prices.

0ubliette wrote:

OR, you could think of it as being that i have played, completed and loved, some of the greatest games of the last 2 generations and the current gen, Soul Calibur, Shenmue, Res evil, Super mario sunshine, Metroid, Zelda, MGS, Okami, Dead rising, Tekken, Ninja gaiden, Crackdown, Street fighter, the list could go on all night. As a hobby id say youve spent just as much building pcs in the same amount of time.

All of which could have been released on a pc, and I could have bought and enjoyed. I'm not attacking the games of consoles(well maybe a little), I'm pissed of about the fact that because of a stigma about gaming pc's and exclusive deals I cant play them on my pc.

0ubliette wrote:

If you havent, then all i can say is good luck to ya chum.........p

I have

0ubliette

krazy_8s wrote:

All of which could have been released on a pc, and I could have bought and enjoyed. I'm not attacking the games of consoles(well maybe a little), I'm pissed of about the fact that because of a stigma about gaming pc's and exclusive deals I cant play them on my pc.

*sigh* And here we go again. That magic word. COULD have.
Namco didnt release Soul Calibur on PC because of a 'stigma about pc gaming', but because Sega wanted the game as a flagship title for thier console and paid them quite well for the privelige. Ditto for EVERY OTHER EXCLUSIVE GAME MENTIONED. Its not because game developers dont like PC's because theres a 'stigma' about them. PC gaming, aside from mmo's is nowhere near as popular as console gaming in japan, where most of these games are developed. THATS why you wont see them on PC.
This discussion is going nowhere apart from in circles. If youre happy enough to think your pc is powerful enough to play dead rising, but not actually play the game, that fine. I'm not gonna try and change your mind. What i will do, is continue to enjoy playing games on my PC, and when i want something different, fire up my 360, or my ps2, or my cube, and just enjoy gaming.

Kiith

I consider myself a PC gamer at heart, yet there are at least 3 or 4 console games in my all time top10 games list. I would (consider) buying a console for a specific game, like i am considering getting the Wii for Twilight Princess.

But on any console, ever, there have only been 3-5 (maybe as many as 10 on the ps2 over 7 years) games that i would actaully be interested in playing/buying. I have lost count of the amount of games that i have bought, and will be buying on the PC. The diversity on the PC is, imo, far greater, and as others have said, the extra content available from the community is staggering. Granted, some of it is ****, but some of it has become more popular then the game itself (Counter Strike anyone?).

As for popluarity, I agree that consoles are more popular, because they are (in the beginning) cheaper and easier to use. But with the PS3 being a minumum of €600+ and €70-80+ for a game, this cost will quickly rise to near PC levels. Also, you have to remember that one of the biggest gaming phenomenons since Pac-Man is on the PC at the moment. World of Warcraft, with 8 million current subscribers, shows just how popular PC games can be.

In the end, regardless of price, simplicity, and content, it is a matter of opinion. I like PC games more then consoles (and i think they are, for the most part, better games). But my wall of tect has critted everyone for 1 million damage now, so i'll stop.

And don't get me started on Sony....RIDGE RACER!!!!

Khalim

Heh. This thread is still open.

I for one love pc gaming because it is the most comfortable setup for playing RTS at the moment.

The one thing I really hate about pc gaming?

Day one patches. (And another...and another...and another) :mad:

Why bother rushing the product out?

Reviews will undoubtably suffer, and the game will receive negative comments on message boards and the like.

I now wait until major bugs are sorted out before I actually go out and buy the game.

Until they sort out this problem I will divide my time between the easy setup and play of consoles and the lovely pc.

Games for Windows! This is the future!

TheAlmightyArse

krazy_8s wrote:

I said that pc's were capable of running emulators for these consoles, not that emulators that are home brewed work perfectly on them.

"Capable". Really. Buy a PC that costs as much as a PS2 and let me know when you've got PS2 games running perfectly on it.

krazy_8s wrote:

That being said, I have got some ps2 and x-box emulators working on them with certain games.

Certian games working on a no doubt high-end PC which would play as well, if not better, and along with all their brethren, on consoles which cost about €100 these days.

krazy_8s wrote:

From the looks of things, microsoft and sony don't seem to be doing much better on consoles designed to be backwards compatible.

Thanks! You've just made my point for me. If massive corporations with dedicated teams of programmers can't get software emulation working properly on surperior machines, what does that say about the homebrew community's cahnces?

krazy_8s wrote:

And yet small projects with no backing are having moderate success on pc's. Which brings us back to the point of money being wasted on consoles.

I concede: SNES9x and Kega FUsion do run my 16-bit games as well as their console counterparts. It's a shame the same can't be said about the Saturn, or the PS1, the N64, the Xbox, Gamecube, PS2, Wii, XBox 360, DS, PS3, and not forgetting the Virtual Boy. Or the Wonderswan.

Now, you mentioned spending money. Let's keep that in mind for the next bit.

krazy_8s wrote:

As for the cost of buying a good pc, with proper selection of parts I maintain a extremely good pc for around 400-500 quid a year.

Sorrry, excuse me?

krazy_8s wrote:

400-500 quid a year

Er, what?

krazy_8s wrote:

400-500 quid a year!!!

I added the exclamation marks and text formatting myself to accentuate what an amazing amount of money this is is to spend every year on games hardware. As a dedicated gamer myself, with more games I'm itching to play than I have time, if it came to 400-500 quid a year, I'd probably take up crochet.

krazy_8s wrote:

I choose what parts I buy for longevity and sell the old ones. The problem is buying the whole lot at the start outright, which is quite expensive.

And let's not forget the 400-500 quid, which is paid out each year. You can't seriously be calling consoles expensive, can you?

krazy_8s wrote:

Both the xbox360 and ps3 use gfx chips that are essentially mid range pc gfx cards. and the cpus are so bloody close to pc chips now its amazing.

You seem to be arguing against yourself again. The premium XBox 360 costs a fraction of the equivalent gaming PC, and will have a far longer life.

krazy_8s wrote:

Buying a ps2 when it came out, x-box when it was released and Gamecube as well including controllers and accessories(dvd remote anyone) would cost a hell of a lot more then a good pc. Saying they are cheap now is like saying a old pc is cheap.

Yes. But, buy a PC as old as a PS2. Will it cost €100 (which is what I paid for my slimline PS2 almost two years ago)? Will it play games as demanding as those for the PS2, at any time in its life? Will it play brand new games just released last Friday? Will it bobbins.

krazy_8s wrote:

Hardware moves on, consoles don't.

Yes they do. PS1. PS2, PS3. The clue is in the name there.

krazy_8s wrote:

At least with pc's the re-sale value is still considerable.

You'll get more for a year-old PC than you will for a year-old console only because it cost more in the first place.

krazy_8s wrote:

Gaming pc with support(ie games released on pc as well) would mean that 4 controllers(maybe 8 or 10 since there would not have to be a set limit) would be the only ones you would need for years.

YES, YOU'LL SURELY RECOUP THE MANY HUNDREDS OF EURO MORE YOUR PC COST BY SAVING ON CONTROLLERS. HOW SILLY OF ME.

krazy_8s wrote:

I have hit many bugs in games for consoles. Graphical glitches, un-foreseen advantages in multilayer(goldeneye, cursor targets through wall).

Yes. And of course, PC games work perfectly. Like, for example, American McGee's Alice, which works fine on my laptop but crashes before the title screen for no discernable reason if I try it on my near-identical PC.

krazy_8s wrote:

and the consoles that can have this funny thing of just not working again.

I have a NES which I got for Christmas when I was five. At twenty-two, I can still have a few rounds of Duck Hunt with absolutely no bother whenever I feel like it. The PC I bought ten years ago barely switches on.

krazy_8s wrote:

Google ring of death/xbox360.

Are you seriously suggesting that PCs never have technical trouble. Seriously? Honestly now?

krazy_8s wrote:

The cd drive for the mega drive, the ill fabled similar drive the the n64 that never came out. Tape drives for the commandor. The dvd remote needed for the x-box.

Weren't you complaining before that consoles can't be upgraded? This won't work until you make up your mind. (DVD remote "needed" for the Xbox? For which games, exactly?)

krazy_8s wrote:

The tiny memory cards needed for consoles sold at horrendous prices.

In the alst five years I've spent, in all, about €20 on memory cards. It's no 400-500 quid a year, but indeed, horrendous.

krazy_8s wrote:

I have [been playing console exclusives on PC]

This week, I have played shiny new God Hand and Okami on the PS2 I bought two years ago for €100, €103 including the horrendously priced memory card and controller. Have you been playing them on your two-year-old €103 PC? You have not.

0ubliette

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Yes. And of course, PC games work perfectly. Like, for example, American McGee's Alice, which works fine on my laptop but crashes before the title screen for no discernable reason if I try it on my near-identical PC.

Yeah, PC's never have trouble runnig games. Case in point, the 'amazing' new PC game ArmA, which:

1)Doesnt load textures. At all.
2)Has THE WORST graphical screw ups ive ever seen (square wheels on trucks, soldiers with textureless triangular faces etc)
3)Missions that dont actually work. I.E. key trigger points in the mission dont get triggered
4)BSOD's
All on my amd 64 3400, 1gb ram, and 7800GS. Not exactly a crap machine by anyones standard.
In the 6 years ive owned a PS2, i can count on one hand the number of times its crashed. Id say, roughly 3 times. In 6 years. Show me a PC thats done that.

5uspect

The PC goes in the office or bedroom for solitary gaming, the console goes in the living room under the telly for fun with the lads.
Both offer different gaming experiences that are both worthwhile just to mention a few:
Sure a PC is better for mods, tweaking, even developing.
Consoles are unbeatable for quick offline multiplayer.

Consoles are developing into specialised PCs just as gaming PCs are also developing into their own area. Indeed gaming laptops are maturing and I think fill a void between the console and PC. Now you can potentially bring your laptop to a mates house hook it up to the plasma and play away.

Ultimately in a few years there's be such close convergence that your xbox will be running Vista anyway, sure didn't they get Linux running on a 360 recently?

R0ot

Zillah get your ass back in Eve!

Zillah

R0ot wrote:

Zillah get your ass back in Eve!

Apparently I can have a 7 day free trial with my account reactivated so I think I'll drop in some time soon to say hi

po0k

5uspect wrote:

Ultimately in a few years there's be such close convergence that your xbox will be running Vista anyway, sure didn't they get Linux running on a 360 recently?

hello.c

Cuddlesworth

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

"Capable". Really. Buy a PC that costs as much as a PS2 and let me know when you've got PS2 games running perfectly on it.

wow your points are so great. Buy a ps2 and watch it play pc games without hours of development. The same can be said the other way around. Thats my point.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

certain games working on a no doubt high-end PC which would play as well, if not better, and along with all their brethren, on consoles which cost about €100 these days.

Not they won't. And you are fooling yourself if you think they can. They are limited, in graphics terms, draw distances and loading times.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Thanks! You've just made my point for me. If massive corporations with dedicated teams of programmers can't get software emulation working properly on surperior machines, what does that say about the homebrew community's cahnces?

The large corporations don't care. Nintendo does and its games are coming along great including the n64 ones.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

I concede: SNES9x and Kega FUsion do run my 16-bit games as well as their console counterparts. It's a shame the same can't be said about the Saturn, or the PS1, the N64, the Xbox, Gamecube, PS2, Wii, XBox 360, DS, PS3, and not forgetting the Virtual Boy. Or the Wonderswan.

I'm glad you concede.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Now, you mentioned spending money. Let's keep that in mind for the next bit.

It's on my mind

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Sorrry, excuse me?

For what?

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Er, what?

This isn't going anywhere.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

I added the exclamation marks and text formatting myself to accentuate what an amazing amount of money this is is to spend every year on games hardware. As a dedicated gamer myself, with more games I'm itching to play than I have time, if it came to 400-500 quid a year, I'd probably take up crochet.

Considering games cost around 60 quid now, 10 games costs 600. So as a dedicated gaming how many games do you buy?

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

And let's not forget the 400-500 quid, which is paid out each year. You can't seriously be calling consoles expensive, can you?

I can and will. I maintain a top end pc. It never struggles with any games. If I was going to keep a more moderate but still powerful system I would be spending around 250-300 a year.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

You seem to be arguing against yourself again. The premium XBox 360 costs a fraction of the equivalent gaming PC, and will have a far longer life.

True, but at the end of its life.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Yes. But, buy a PC as old as a PS2. Will it cost €100 (which is what I paid for my slimline PS2 almost two years ago)? Will it play games as demanding as those for the PS2, at any time in its life? Will it play brand new games just released last Friday? Will it bobbins.

Yeah, it will. People have got Doom 3 running on a 266mhz pentium. All it involves is dumbing down the graphics. as for 100 quid pc, not really that hard to get anymore second hand with half decent specs. My company pays people to take away pc's still capable of running some great games.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Yes they do. PS1. PS2, PS3. The clue is in the name there.

Lol, thats funny. R&D costs and each console selling at a loss means that the next console from Sony is unlikely to come around for the next 10 years, until Sony starts to make a profit. Where do you think pc's will be in 5 years?

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

You'll get more for a year-old PC than you will for a year-old console only because it cost more in the first place.

I get more out of my purchase as well, with a variety or different functions which justifies the cost.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

YES, YOU'LL SURELY RECOUP THE MANY HUNDREDS OF EURO MORE YOUR PC COST BY SAVING ON CONTROLLERS. HOW SILLY OF ME.

YES I WILL RECOUP THE MANY HUNDREDS OF EURO I SPENT ON MY PC BUY NOT BUYING CONSOLES OR CONTROLLERS AND WHEN IM NOT PLAYING GAMES TO EARN A LIVING OFF OF IT.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Yes. And of course, PC games work perfectly. Like, for example, American McGee's Alice, which works fine on my laptop but crashes before the title screen for no discernable reason if I try it on my near-identical PC.

A problem that can be fixed. And don't say you have tried everything, from the sounds of it you have tried nothing. On the other hand, any problems both software or hardware with any of those consoles can't be fixed unless the company fix's it.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

I have a NES which I got for Christmas when I was five. At twenty-two, I can still have a few rounds of Duck Hunt with absolutely no bother whenever I feel like it. The PC I bought ten years ago barely switches on.

Chip life shortens every time they shrink the die. Pc's were always ahead of consoles and as a result the lifespan is never going to be as long. But, consoles are heading into this territory now, heat and chip life span will become a issue, just like it is with pc's.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Are you seriously suggesting that PCs never have technical trouble. Seriously? Honestly now?

depends, the problem with pc's is that they give people too much freedom. Freedom to break things at will. Its both win and lose, but valid point.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Weren't you complaining before that consoles can't be upgraded? This won't work until you make up your mind. (DVD remote "needed" for the Xbox? For which games, exactly?)

For dvds. And it wasn't a upgrade it was a un-nessicary expenditure, the xbox was able to play dvds without just not allowed.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

In the alst five years I've spent, in all, about €20 on memory cards. It's no 400-500 quid a year, but indeed, horrendous.

Wow back to this again. I said, buying consoles and games and accessory's not just memory cards.

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

This week, I have played shiny new God Hand and Okami on the PS2 I bought two years ago for €100, €103 including the horrendously priced memory card and controller. Have you been playing them on your two-year-old €103 PC? You have not.

Yesterday I bought supreme commander for my pc. Have you been playing it on your 2 year old ps2? Do you think it could play it? Pc's can play those games. They just need the support at the start to allow the game to be programmed for the platform.

TheAlmightyArse

krazy_8s wrote:

Some guff

The point I was making, and the point I made several times throughout my post, but the point you've brilliantly managed to completely miss, is this: a console will play games more hardware-intensive, more reliably, than a PC of equal value.

Bear this in mind:
1) Consoles are specifically designed to run games, nothing else. Much, much cheaper.
2) Consoles are built to a specific standard. Programmers know exactly what their software has to run on. Much, much more efficient.

Sand

The point I was making, and the point I made several times throughout my post, but the point you've brilliantly managed to completely miss, is this: a console will play games more hardware-intensive, more reliably, than a PC of equal value.

Bear this in mind:
1) Consoles are specifically designed to run games, nothing else. Much, much cheaper.
2) Consoles are built to a specific standard. Programmers know exactly what their software has to run on. Much, much more efficient

Yeah, if you were EA, youd love consoles. As a gamer....PC does gaming better than any console....and then a whole lot more. And seeing as youre buying a PC just to post on boards why not fork out the extra grand youll spend on consoles to get a decent one?

Retr0gamer

Sand wrote:

Yeah, if you were EA, youd love consoles. As a gamer....PC does gaming better than any console....and then a whole lot more. And seeing as youre buying a PC just to post on boards why not fork out the extra grand youll spend on consoles to get a decent one?

And miss out on classics like Okami, Zelda, Shadow of the colossus and God of War? No thanks.

TheAlmightyArse

Sand wrote:

Yeah, if you were EA, youd love consoles.

EA is a massive publisher, on consoles and PCs. It's not the only one on either. I fail to see your point.

Sand wrote:

As a gamer....PC does gaming better than any console....and then a whole lot more. And seeing as youre buying a PC just to post on boards why not fork out the extra grand youll spend on consoles to get a decent one?

Exactly: it would cost a grand to upgrade my PC so I could play the latest games. (And just for games; my PC can already do that "whole lot more", and an upgrade to keep doing it won't be necessary for years.) I've never spent even close to a grand on hardware during any generation of consoles. Last generation, I spent:

€200 (Gamecube)
€100 (GBA)
+ €50 (GBA SP)
€100 (PS2)
€150 (DS)
+ €70 (DS Lite)
= €670

You can add an extra €20 on top of that for memory cards. And that's the most I've ever spent in a single generation.

And I've enjoyed a much, much greater variety of games than I would had I spent more money on keeping my PC up to date. Because consoles have a much wider audience, it's viable to publish a much larger volume of games with far greater variety.

CiaranC

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Because consoles have a much wider audience, it's viable to publish a much larger volume of games with far greater variety.

I do my console gaming on Xbox 360, and its almost exclusively FPS and sports. Where is this variety?

Retr0gamer

CiaranC wrote:

I do my console gaming on Xbox 360, and its almost exclusively FPS and sports. Where is this variety?

You're playing the wrong console if you are looking for variety. The xbox is full of american developed games who develope in a small bracket of genres since most haven't an original bone in their body. Couple that with the fact that most games are PC ports and the japanese developed games are made to cater for the american audience.

RE*AC*TOR

CiaranC wrote:

I do my console gaming on Xbox 360, and its almost exclusively FPS and sports. Where is this variety?

Crackdown, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Viva Pinata, Lost Planet, Gears of War....

None of those are FPS or sports.

Not to mention big games coming up like Blue Dragon, Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed etc etc.

L31mr0d

my 2 cent:

I'd happily move over to console gaming if they would release a decent interface other than the joystick or gamepad. I haven't gamed on a console since Tekken 3 and my main reason is that my favourite games are FPS. Why don't they release a decent keyboard/mouse interface for the xbox 360 or PS3 (maybe they have, I dunno). Not even a keyboard, just an interface with configurable buttons (something like this)

Also, and this might be a mute point but it needs to be said because I know quite a few of my friends factor it in when discussing the pros and cons of console to pc gaming. Fact of the matter is, a lot of my friends haven't spent a dime on a new game for their pc in the last 6 years. Why? Pirating. It is A LOT easier to pirate a game for the PC than it is for the Xbox 360 or PS3 or Wii what with private torrent sites and newsgroups.

So lets say "gamer A" pays £280 for a Xbox 360 and then buys 30 games over the period of a year at £40 each. Bringing his yearly gaming expenditure to ~£1500 (~€2210).

PC "gamer B" spends €1600 building his 1337 computer, then spends €0.00 euro on games, but plays every new release as soon as they are cracked, he is now over €600 better off than "gamer A"

Also as a final point, the graphics capability of a console is always going to be at least a year behind that of a PC's graphics capability. For those that appreciate the eye candy as the principle enjoyment for gaming, consoles will always be sub-par.

sprinkles

30 games a year! I pity the person who buys that many, they really need to get out more.

I'd say the average gamer would buy somewhere in the region of 10 - 15 games a year, thus making your point a little less valid.

But then we can take into account the following year, when the console will still be able to run all the new releases but gamer B will be foreced to spend more money on upgrading the system to cope with the new develpments in physics engines etc...

Put simply PC gaming is a lot more expensive* and too much hassle for the casual gamer and those not interested in WOW esq games


*excludes gaming products by SONY