UT3 PC Sells 33,995, Crysis Sells 86,633 in US in November

0ubliette

L31mr0d wrote: »

*BOOM* Woh!!! my sarcasm detector just exploded, WTF just happened :rolleyes:

I never said Console gamers where retards. Its like assuming everyone who uses a toaster is a retard just because its easy enough to be used by a chimp.

Jeez sorry man i guess when you said "I put it down to the learning curve of playing games on the PC and the non existant learning curve for playing on a console.
Someone with the IQ of a chimp could load up CoD4 on a console. But you need at least a intermediate knowledge of PC's to get the latest graphics drivers, etc" you werent insinuating that console gamers are below PC gamers in the intelligence scale or anything, must've comepletely misinterpreted that bit, my mistake.

Stephen

I think the problem is PC users (I am one) feel threatened by the ever increasing market share of consoles. I can see it eventually getting to the stage where there'll be f**k all released on the PC, and anything that is will be a several months late console port

conzy

Stephen wrote: »

I think the problem is PC users (I am one) feel threatened by the ever increasing market share of consoles. I can see it eventually getting to the stage where there'll be f**k all released on the PC, and anything that is will be a several months late console port

Yup

Even COD4 and UT3 were heavily affected by being multiplatform, COD4 is still awesome on PC but UT3 has suffered a lot...

L31mr0d

0ubliette wrote: »

Jeez sorry man i guess when you said "..." you werent insinuating that console gamers are below PC gamers in the intelligence scale or anything, must've comepletely misinterpreted that bit, my mistake.

*BOOM* Damn man I just bought a brand spanking new sarcasm detector and it just exploded. Thanks a lot :rolleyes:

Ok let me re-word that using, lets say, making toast

"I put it down to the learning curve of making melba toast under the grill and the non existant learning curve for making toast in a toaster.
Someone with the IQ of a chimp could load up two slices of bread in a toaster. But you need at least a intermediate knowledge of toast to make it melba, etc"

Do you still take offence? Seriously dude, you aren't fighting the good fight by misconstruing the fact i'm saying playing a game on a console is easier. It doesn't mean that people who play on a console are simple. Humans, like pretty much everything in nature, will always take the route of least resistance, and if gamer A wants to play game B now, he's going to get a console and play the game on it that way, as to play it on a pc requires him to also have an interest in/knowledge of computers.

TL;DR:
Consoles gamers AREN'T STUPID, they just don't want the hassle of PC gaming which is reflected in the sales figures

mcgovern

conzymaher wrote: »

Why cant we all just get along

But in all seriousness, it is aggravating to hear people ****e on about Halo saying that it is THE multiplayer experience fullstop. when in fact It has nothing on any decent PC shooter, and thats a FACT.

In fairness, your arguements are even more flawed. Few people say Halo is the ultimate gaming experience, it won't win game of the year or online experience of the year for the 360, never mind of all time. CoD4, for instance, blows it out of the water.
And there are very few PC shooters out these days not also on a console.

conzymaher wrote: »

ITS CHEAPER! How many of you have bought 1000 euro TVs to use these consoles to their full potential? Halo costs what 70 euro? Orange Box on the PC had FIVE excellent games, each scoring 90% average in reviews all for around 40 euro...

Orange Box was on 360 and PS3 as well? And could be got for not much more than €40 online.
You could hook your console upto the same monitor you use for your PC, so thats another moot point.

conzymaher wrote: »

IT JUST WORKS! How many have had issues with Xbox360s dieing, game patches etc. How frustrating is it to have to send your console away for a month to be fixed when 99% of Pc problems can be fixed in minutes, and if a component is broken, a new part can be had in days...

If your console breaks, you send it off and it comes back fixed. No going out and buying new parts, no opening it up and fiddling with things most people don't have a clue what they are/do. If you want to, most of the console problems can be fixed yourself, but why bother?
If you were waiting on parts to be repaired on a PC without buying a replacement most likely you'd be waiting a month or more too while it is RMA'd. Game patches are automatic, no having to go find them and install.


To be perfectly honest, you sound like one of the anti-Halo brigade, and because you don't like that one game, you hate all consoles.

And yes I have a PC capable of running most recent games, and the last one I bought for PC was HL2 the day it came out (and that was on my old PC).

challengemaster

mcgovern wrote: »

In fairness, your arguements are even more flawed. Few people say Halo is the ultimate gaming experience, it won't win game of the year or online experience of the year for the 360, never mind of all time. CoD4, for instance, blows it out of the water.
And there are very few PC shooters out these days not also on a console.

most aren't the same as pc versions though. eg. UT3 on the console is 30% slower than pc. you cant play console vs pc multiplayer games, can you? Is CS on console? Quake? most of the UT's (bar ut3)? the real reason games are being made for console now is just to sell more, and get more profit.

Orange Box was on 360 and PS3 as well? And could be got for not much more than €40 online.
You could hook your console upto the same monitor you use for your PC, so thats another moot point.

yeah, but you had to wait

anyway, you're telling me that most people actually thought of that? I'd say most saw something about hd tv's and ps3 somewhere, and went and bought brand new HDTV's. not connecting it to their pc monitor.

If your console breaks, you send it off and it comes back fixed. No going out and buying new parts, no opening it up and fiddling with things most people don't have a clue what they are/do. If you want to, most of the console problems can be fixed yourself, but why bother?
If you were waiting on parts to be repaired on a PC without buying a replacement most likely you'd be waiting a month or more too while it is RMA'd. Game patches are automatic, no having to go find them and install.

I'd say roughly, 75%+ of pc gamers, build their own pc's. So saying they dont know what they're at.. would be a bit wrong. oh and if you get a good RMA it will take maybe 2 weeks at very most. thing is, with pc's you CAN actually get a replacement in the meantime. consoles you cant. obviously why you decided to exclude it.

To be perfectly honest, you sound like one of the anti-Halo brigade, and because you don't like that one game, you hate all consoles.

And yes I have a PC capable of running most recent games, and the last one I bought for PC was HL2 the day it came out (and that was on my old PC).

He also didn't mention about console games not being controllable at all, eg. in game configs, etc etc.

God knows where all the pro fps players would be without weapon binds.. oh and it doesnt matter if your pc isnt 1337, you can just turn down the gfx quality.

Maximilian

I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that all console owners are poor, as well as retarded.

Thank you.

Q_Ball

DemocAnarchis wrote: »

Tbh, the price differences between pc gaming and consoles isnt as vast as some people believe. The PC im currently using will run anything except crysis at max settings, and coupled with my monitor cost me about €1150. A PS3 and a decent HDTV would cost around €900.

I still play my 360 on SDTV . When I buy a HDTV it wont be just for the consoles, it'll be for DVDs too (pc's can do) and TV (pc's can do, but with a bit of trouble setting up PCI cards etc). Plus cant you play pc games on a HDTV if you have the correct DVI / HDMI output?

When did you buy your pc btw? Surely if you built it recently then you would have made sure it'll run crysis at max? thats what i'd do anyway seeing as there's a high rate of redundancy for top of the range graphics cards (and to a lesser extent CPU).

Games only look as good as they're programmed to. PCs will always be more powerful than consoles due to the more frequent hardware cycles. Does PC COD4 look much prettier than the 360 version or are they roughly the same?

DemocAnarchis wrote: »

although in 90% of the cases I have problems trying to run a game, a quick google search sorts me out in five minutes.

You can do that but i'll be playing five minutes more than you

and Halo 3 = meh, even online. I've had more fun playing TFC all those years ago than playing Halo 3

L31mr0d

In all honesty, i'll be buying a PS3 next year.

I'm willing to accept that the PC is fighting a losing battle in regards to gaming, sure the PC will still have games released for it, but I see the exclusives dropping off steadily.

What's happening is that the PC isn't even trying to compete any more. Consoles are absorbing PC genres and not doing too bad at it either. Whereas the PC is just sticking with what it knows.

I mean they release racing games for PC and don't bother offering split screen support for multiplayer. How many platformers where released for PC in the last year? What about beat em ups, what was the last one you played on the PC (for me, probably virtua fighter *shudder*)

Which is why i'll be getting a PS3, i'm sick of missing out on genres. I had considered a Xbox360 but there are no big games coming out in the next year for it that aren't either being released on the PC or the PS3.

User45701

Hmmm. I dont get it.

I owned a pc before i owned a console, before i got my first console which was a saga mega drive. Anyway i remember when that Wang pc arrived 2 mb of ram i think was it windows 3.1? i dont remember i was a kid. But what a pc and every few years i have upgraded or bought a new one. i have had other consoles like the N64 but that for the simple reason of goldeneye.

PC's are better because they offer a wider range of games and a better gaming experience?
For those who have played gears of war on both pc and 360 which has easyer controls?

I got a wii a while back, tbh i dont get enough use out of it. i played the sports and all allot and today in work i came 3rd in a competation so i got a ps3, but i hate playstations so what do they retail at? 400 euro i think? or is it 400 dollers?

Anyway im thinking of keeping it for a single game, burnout. Burnout games are great for partys just like goldeneye and the wii. so im thinking of just keeping it but i havent seen or heard of even 1 good game on the ps3 so i dont know.

Also i cant enjoy a RPG on a console, im waiting for EA to port mass effect to the pc and as for CnC have you tried to play them on consoles? Strategy games on consoles is not much fun.

They seem to be slightly better for driving games but then again the game "Driver" was much better on the pc than on the ps1 or 2 or whatever.

Sports games seem to be popular on consoles, im not a fan of any of the new games, the orginal Fifa International soccer on the saga was good but its far too detailed and uninteresting to play sports games now. The point of a computer sports game is fun and i dont think it matters which of the countless thousands of name/faceless leage football players, why does it matter who is on whoes team, what mood they are in ect? Load of bollox it is.

PC's can be upgraded and they have much more functionality than consoles, consoles seem to be just adding more and more pc features so it figures that withtin a 12-15 year time span pc and console will not be different, there will just be PC's because there wont be a big enough international market to be proftable to produce and sell a console, we live in a ****ed up country and we will probbleybe very simmilar in 10 years but other parts of the word do change quicker and if other parts of the world arnt interested in a new console then why would a company bother if there is not maxamum proffit in it.

Hopefully in the future the industry will restructure itself more tward game production than these pathetic console wars.

I also hold allot of anger twards consoles for taking games away from the pc. i played gta 1 & 2 on the pc but i lost interest in the gta series after i started having to wait long after ps release for the pc version and the game holds no interest then because the wait has been too long. I hope the same does not happen with mass effect.

I just dont understand how someone could think a console is better than a PC. for one thing people seem to think cost=better
Buying a new TV people will assume the more expensive/brand name is better so why does this not the same in the gaming industry? something costs more = make sit better? i dont think that but allot of the masses do. I cant name that many good console games besides
old ones. Good console exclusive games released in the last 8 or so years?

I dont know. I cant think of any besides recently Burnout as a fun game, i suppose some of the wii games but i find the entertainment value with the wii is only really high if there is more than 1 person? Anyone else think this?

I just think pc's are better wihtout 1 there are so many games,tv shows and websites when i think of all the amusment my pc's have given me vs all the amusement consoles have me PC wins. Cost? i dont know i had stoped buying/playing consoles by the time i started working and when i bought a wii last christmass i didnt want it so it went at the boards santa strike force. so i dont spend money on consoles but i have never found there entertainment value to = that of a PC.

thelordofcheese

User45701 wrote: »

Hmmm. I dont get it.
PC's are better because they offer a wider range of games and a better gaming experience?

Not really, you'll find more diversity of titles on the consoles, especially given that the japanese don't really do PC games. Thats some of the best studios in the world excluded right away

User45701 wrote: »

PC's can be upgraded and they have much more functionality than consoles, consoles seem to be just adding more and more pc features so it figures that withtin a 12-15 year time span pc and console will not be different, there will just be PC's because there wont be a big enough international market to be proftable to produce and sell a console, we live in a ****ed up country and we will probbleybe very simmilar in 10 years but other parts of the word do change quicker and if other parts of the world arnt interested in a new console then why would a company bother if there is not maxamum proffit in it.

Aside from the fact you seem to have gone mental for the second half of this (seriously, what are you trying to say, i can't grasp it at all), your original point, a staple of the PC argument, doesn't really work.
Granted you *can* do alot with a PC, if you are so inclined, but i fail to see how editing yet another terrible CS video with a drowning pool soundtrack for uploading to youtube, has any impact on the PC as a games machine. You could, with enough effort get the original Xbox to be a linux based medai server if you wanted, but that doesn't count for much when your trying to argue which is the better gaming platform.

User45701 wrote: »

I also hold allot of anger twards consoles for taking games away from the pc.

It's not the consoles fault they make more business sense than your platform of choice. It's business. Companies will go where the money is.

User45701 wrote: »

I just dont understand how someone could think a console is better than a PC. for one thing people seem to think cost=better
Buying a new TV people will assume the more expensive/brand name is better so why does this not the same in the gaming industry? something costs more = make sit better? i dont think that but allot of the masses do.

Yes, i'm sure the 'masses' do think like that. Whomever you think the masses are.
But as people have gone to lenghts to point out, while PC's are more expensive they are also associated with a mess of technical problems, and the idea that the item that you spend a grand plus on will be obsolete in six months.
People might willingly spend alot on a new Tv, but they also know it'll be good for a few years.

User45701 wrote: »

I cant name that many good console games besides
old ones. Good console exclusive games released in the last 8 or so years?

If you honestly think that, you're lying to yourself.

Kiith

thelordofcheese wrote:

and the idea that the item that you spend a grand plus on will be obsolete in six months.

This is something people really need to stop saying. Unless you buy an absolute piss poor pc, its not going to obselete in six months. I bought my pc over a year and a half ago (for €1250) and it still plays almost every game on full settings. Crysis, obviously, pisses all over it from a great height. But Bioshock, World in Conflict, Stranglehold etc... all play pretty much perfectly. And its still got at least another year of playing games at medium to high settings.

And i'm not getting involved in this argument (AGAIN!!!!), i'm just pointing out this "obsolete in 6 months" statement is bullcrap.

mcgovern

challengemaster wrote: »

most aren't the same as pc versions though. eg. UT3 on the console is 30% slower than pc. you cant play console vs pc multiplayer games, can you? Is CS on console? Quake? most of the UT's (bar ut3)? the real reason games are being made for console now is just to sell more, and get more profit.
yeah, but you had to wait

anyway, you're telling me that most people actually thought of that? I'd say most saw something about hd tv's and ps3 somewhere, and went and bought brand new HDTV's. not connecting it to their pc monitor.

I'd say roughly, 75%+ of pc gamers, build their own pc's. So saying they dont know what they're at.. would be a bit wrong. oh and if you get a good RMA it will take maybe 2 weeks at very most. thing is, with pc's you CAN of tactually get a replacement in the meantime. consoles you cant. obviously why you decided to exclude it.



He also didn't mention about console games not being controllable at all, eg. in game configs, etc etc.

God knows where all the pro fps players would be without weapon binds.. oh and it doesnt matter if your pc isnt 1337, you can just turn down the gfx quality.

Again, another load of uninformed, incorrect points.
Counter Strike was on a console (albeit not as good). Most of the Quakes and UTs were/are.
The Orange Box was released at the exact same time on PC and 360, so no waiting.
In Shadowrun you can play PC vs Console (though I don't see how this would be solely a point down for consoles and not the PC also if it were not doable).
If people decide to buy a HD TV instead of a monitor, that is not a disadvantage of a console, its their choice, just like some PC owners hook their PCs upto big HD TVs.
The fact that most PC Gamers know how to use/build a PC does not nullify the fact that a lot of the gaming public don't. It's a disadvantage to the rest of them, hence why they don't buy gaming PCs.

Most console games are at least somewhat configurable, and as a big FPS fan, K&M or joypad is a personal preference and K&M is supported by the PS3.

Azza

There is nothing wrong with either console or PC as a gaming format.

I personal think PC gaming is superior of the two its plus points out weighing the negative although consoles have their charms too.

There is a truly a fantastic selection of games on both consoles but as a single format I think the PC has a better selection of games over any one console.
It pretty much bests the consoles in FPS and RTS. The console also can't compete with MMORPG and the PC has also better products in the small simulation market. Sports games are a tie with most stuff coming out on all the formats and the play equally well on any machine. RPG's is where maybe the consoles edge it out and third person shooters.
The PC also supports higher quality graphics although its pretty marginal at the moment it will get larger over the coming years because as we all know the hardware is static in a console.
There is also a much better established online playing environment than consoles currently.
PC gamers can be frustrated and rewarded when it comes to tweaking the PC to get games to work. This gives them a higher level of technical expertise when it comes to the workings of their machine. However this can lead to snobbery towards console players.
This is also one of its major drawbacks as getting things in order to play games can be time consuming and a vexing process.
Game modding is supported on some games.
PC has a better default control scheme than the consoles in the keyboard and mouse and supports all console controllers if necessary. (even if the console supports the keyboard and mouse, I can't see it being used much)
While this is a personal preference for some a mouse and keyboard player who simply cake walk over an opponent with a joypad in a a game like say UT3 or Gears of War.
Finally PC games are cheaper. On average you could buy 12 pc games for every 10 console games.

The consoles have a number of good factors.
Price being one. They are alot cheaper and more bang for your buck. However you may have to spend more if you need a HD telly sometimes negating that advantage.
Normally played on bigger screen.
Less hassle getting the thing to work.
Less issues with stability and glitches(although its starting to happen more)
Still new technology meaning games will improve slightly graphically as designers get to grips with their respective systems.
Not as awkward to move around.
No need to upgrade the machine. (which is a good and a bad thing in a way)

I own a PC a PS2 a PS1 an N64 a Wii and PSP.
I would use the PC more than the others combined but I still like the consoles.

PC gaming for the first time since 1998 actually saw and increase in sales revenue last year. It made just under 1 billion dollars. Those figures do not include revenue generated from online distribution services like steam. Nor does it include the small amount generated from in game advertisement. Nor does it include the large amount generated from MMORPG games like World of Warcraft. Also a thriving and profitable casual gaming industry has recently cropped up on the PC.

Still the numbers are small compared to console gaming sales figures but nevertheless the money earned from PC gaming last year exceeded 1 billion US dollars so its not exactly a dead industry now.

Secondly while not a primary money maker for AMD or Intel they do have a profitable product lines that cater for gamers and would not be in their interest to see PC gaming die. Its a extremely important segment for the likes of Nvidia, ATI(now owned by AMD) and Creative. Nividia for example who just recently posted its first billion dollar quater would stand to loose a lot of money if the PC gaming market dried up. Their profit was primarily due to sales of its desktop and notebook graphics card solutions.

PC gaming will never make as much as console cause no one markets them near as much as console games. There is no one force marketing PC gaming. Independent game developers can't afford to market games. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo on the other hand have massive advertising campaigns going on promoting their consoles and games for their consoles.
I firmly believe its not the technical difficulty of running a PC that primarily puts gamers off using PC's in favor of consoles (still a factor though) but most people simply do not even consider PC gaming because they know almost nothing off it. Having worked in a rental store that rented games I often heard the argument about which console is better which alot of the time the people arguing are doing so for the sake of prestige. This consoles has games xyz while this consoles had games abc with better graphics. When I mention to them they games xy and ab are on the PC with better graphics they are "like really never knew that".

As for the topic of exclusives that L31mr0d mentioned while it does look like less exclusives on the PC its not entirely bad for PC's. Also I predict that with the current consoles now having a more equal market share than the last generation of consoles (and no runaway market leader like the PS2 with a 110 million machine install base) and the huge costs of game development (MGS4 needs to sell 1 million copies on day one to make back its money) that there will be less in total exclusive titles to one format. Even the head of Sony America stated that he understands that game developers have to go multi format to make their money back. The PC with its least profitability was the first to suffer from this and piracy did not help its cause.

However look at the major A (list)games we have and are getting for each machine. I'll try to think of as many as I can.

Super Smash Bros Brawl (Wii)
Mario Kart Wii (Wii)
Oblivion (PS3, Xbox360, PC)
Super Mario Galaxy (Wii)
Zelda Twilight Princess (Wii)
Metal Gear Solid 4(PS3 but expected to go to Xbox 360 at later date)
Gears of War (Xbox 360, PC)
Crysis(PC,possible console version later)
The Witcher (PC)
Command and Conquer 3 (Xbox 360, PC)
Resident Evil 4 (Gamecube/Wii,PS2/3, PC)
Resident Evil UC (Wii)
Resident Evil 5 (PS3,Xbobx 360, probably ported to PC at later date)
Mass Affect (Xbox 360)
PES 2008 (Wii, PS3, Xbox 360, PC)
FIFA 2008 (Wii, PS3,Xbox 360, PC)
Assassins Creed (PS3, Xbox 360, soon on PC)
UT3 (PC, coming soon on Xbox 360 and sooner on PS3)
GTA4 (PS3, Xbox 360, probably ported to PC at later date)
Medal of Honor (Franchise on each format)
Call of Duty 4 (Xbox 360, PS3, PC)
Company of Heroes (PC)
Supreme Commander (PC,Xbox version soon)
Guitar Hero III (Wii, PC, PS3, Xbox 360)
Alan Wake (Xbox 360, PC)
World In Conflict (PC)
Bioshock (Xbox 360, PC)
Halo 3 (Xbox 360, probably ported to PC at later date)
Starcraft 2 (PC)
Orange Box (PC, PS3, Xbox 360)
Spore (PC)
Far Cry 2 (PC)
Duke Nukem Forever (??????????)
Fallout 3 (PS3, Xbox 360, PC)
Fable 2 (Xbox 360)
Tekken 6 (PS3)
Final Fantasy 13 (PS3)
Gran Turismo 5 (PS3)
Deus Ex 3 (PS3, Xbox 360, PC)
Silent Hill 5 (PS3, Xbox 360)
Project Origin (Xbox 360, PC, PS3)
Halo Wars (Xbox 360)
Devil May Cry 4 (Xbox 360,PS3 and later port to PC)
Wii Fit (Wii)
Star Wars Force Unleashed (Xbox 360,PS3)

I'll stop here. While I'm sure I missed alot of great titles out or coming out on several formats the point I'm making is the PC has still a very impressive selection of games to choose from. If you think another format has a better selection your entitled to your opinion but I think the PC selection is fantastic. Unless you have all the consoles and a PC you will always end up envious of a game exclusive to another format though.

witnessmenow

thelordofcheese wrote: »

No, Just no.
Having to register online to play the single player off-line game i just bought is the worst idea ever.
HL2 got away with it because it's quite a good game and the hype machine behind it made people far too curious, but i never, ever want to have to do that again.
I've given you my money, stop making me jump through extra hoops.


.

How many people here in the first 2 years of its release were playing a "borrowed" version ... i know i wasnt. Look at the sales.... drastic times call for drastic measures! A few good points about consoles being in the spring of there life at the moment and eventually be unable to keep up with pc

yoyo

This list doesnt include online sales by pc games which imo makes it irrelevant, for example both these games UT3 and Crysis are available for legal digital download, this way tends to be a slight bit cheaper and is deffinately less hasstle for pc gamers to get their game, Instead of having to go out to a store and pick up the game or buy online and await delivery, you can immediately start downloading once its bought and then play it. Tons of players are going this route, look at steam as a prime example and publishers so far have seen it successful, as the current gen games consoles do not have such a new games download feature, they must have their games bought retail in a shop hence would be giving it a higher score in this point. Not only that, with steam and the likes you can "preload" new games essentially downloading a new games prior to its release date by pre-ordering and have them activate automaticly in minutes the release date of the game!.
Devs also know the pc gaming market wouldnt be as big as the console gaming market, so they come to expect "lower than average" sales on pc platform, bear in mind developers needn't be paying a license per game put out for the pc platform making it not as costly for them as one would think,

Nick

conzy

mcgovern wrote: »

Counter Strike was on a console (albeit not as good) Most of the Quakes and UTs were/are. The Orange Box was released at the exact same time on PC and 360, so no waiting.

LOL ok Quake 4 doesn't work on Xbox 360, both technically and gameplay wise... You just cannot play quake on a console, Quake has movement that is difficult to master even with a keyboard and mouse... Counterstrike on console? I bet about 6 people still play it compared to the millions of CSS players on PC.... Orange Box was primarily a PC title and is just a totally different experience.. also most of it wasn't released at the same time as PC, We had Half Life 2 before the 360 was even conceived... to say that UT was on console before is an insult, UT requires so much skill and technique that can only be accomplished on a PC and that Unreal Championship ****e was not UT....

mcgovern wrote: »

Most console games are at least somewhat configurable

Invert Y axis is about it tbh....

mcgovern wrote: »

You could hook your console upto the same monitor you use for your PC

Hmmmmmmm wouldn't that require a PC?!

Anyway these arguments are never resolved, but you just CANNOT compare multiplayer FPS gaming on a console with PC....

Pc has dedicated maintained servers with up to 64/128 players in some cases

Console has some guy hosting a server on his 360 on his 512k Internet connection, and when he starts losing he can just unplug his Ethernet cable

Pc has keyboards and mouse controls with per pixel accuracy and you can make a 360 degree turn in milliseconds..

Console has a joystick, where you have very inaccurate control aided by varying degrees of "Aim assist" or "hacking" as its sometimes called You can have a somewhat accurate controller if you turn the sensitivity down but it then takes the best part of a week to do a 360 degree turn...

Pc gaming also has a much better gaming community / competitive scene

And all those 10 million WoW players seem to be having a whale of a time

Anyway, Consoles still have their charms but it IS NOT fps..

/me awaits Guitar Hero for his shiny new PS3

mcgovern

conzymaher wrote: »

LOL ok Quake 4 doesn't work on Xbox 360, both technically and gameplay wise... You just cannot play quake on a console, Quake has movement that is difficult to master even with a keyboard and mouse...

I have it, it works fine.

conzymaher wrote: »

Counterstrike on console? I bet about 6 people still play it compared to the millions of CSS players on PC....

And that proves what exactly? That PC gamers are afraid to move on?

conzymaher wrote: »

Orange Box was primarily a PC title and is just a totally different experience.. also most of it wasn't released at the same time as PC, We had Half Life 2 before the 360 was even conceived...

HL2 != The Orange Box. The Orange Box, which is what you said we had to wait for, was out at the exact same time on both formats. And to say they are completly different experiences is a load of waffle. I have HL2 and Episode 1 (plus CS:S incidentatly which I never play) on the PC, and The Orange box on 360. I enjoyed both.
P.S. While HL2 was out a good while before it moved to consoles, it was also on the original Xbox before the 360 came out.

conzymaher wrote: »

to say that UT was on console before is an insult, UT requires so much skill and technique that can only be accomplished on a PC and that Unreal Championship ****e was not UT....

Here we go again, only PC gamers are skillful etc..
The games were out on consoles, whether you liked them or not or they were any good or not, is a completely different point than the one you made.

conzymaher wrote: »

Invert Y axis is about it tbh....

Out of intrest, when was the last time you played on a console?

conzymaher wrote: »

Hmmmmmmm wouldn't that require a PC?!

To use the same monitor as you use for you PC, quite obviously yes :rolleyes:
It need not be a top of the range PC though, or you could *shock horror* do what many console owners have done, and just buy a monitor without having a PC.


Oh, regarding the competitive scene, I think you'll find Ireland has only one professional gamer afaik, and he plays on a console.

conzy

#1 I said competitive not "Pr0" and when did I limit it to Ireland?

#2 You suck and you wont ever understand

Kiith

STOP IT!! STOP IT!! STOP IT!!! ARGGGGGGHHHHH!!!!

This argument is just looping over and over and over and over and over again. Can't we all just get along!!

super_furry

For me it's just the hassle of PC gaming that puts me off. I play World of Warcraft a fair bit on my laptop, but that's pretty much it. If a multi-format game is released and I want it, I'll always get it on the console because I know I can get it up and working instantly without any hassle. I don't have to worry how it will look, what framerate it will run at or if there's problems getting online.

To my mind consoles, particularly the Xbox 360, have taken the best aspect of PC gaming - intergrated online gaming - and simplified it so it's available to everyone. Aside from the uber-graphics you'll get from a massively expensive system that CAN run the likes of Crysis, I just don't see any benefit in PC gaming, aside from MMORPGs.

papu

PC > CONSOEL

for everything except FiFa'00
great game...

no seriously , consolers may have some skill , but its confined within the ranks of their own relm , joypad is great and all , but mouse and keyboard is better.

there has not yet been a game to fully allow joypad vs mouse , the closest you could get to it would be to play cod4 on pc and have someone use a wireless 360 controller.

i shall test this sometime ..
anyways , sales dont mean one thing is better than the other.they sell more bicycles than cars doesnt mean that bicycles go faster.

pc's re more hassle (and thats more hassle to build your own superrig , but if your insanely rich buy a high end Xps from dell , stick in a game dvd let it install and away you go!)
, more adaptive , more upgradeable , and more range of games.
ty and goodnight

0ubliette

conzymaher wrote: »

#1 I said competitive not "Pr0" and when did I limit it to Ireland?

#2 You suck and you wont ever understand

Wow, i cen tell from your completely well thought out and professionally argued points there that you're in no way shape or form completely biased towards the PC, and as such, every point you've made thus far are all 100% valid, comepletely true statements.
Suffice to say that when i return home from work tonight i shall instantly take a sledgehammer to my xbox360, ps3 and all my retro consoles, all games including and not limited to crackdown, the darkness, DiRT, Gears of war (thats right, consoles had it a year before PC), Halo 3, Assassins Creed, Bioshock, Ace combat 6 etc etc and burn them. I shall Burn the hell out of them for not being a copy of unreal tournament on the PC. All hail mighty unreal tournament and its vastly superior keyboard and mouse configuration!! Even tho its like 8 years old and the last good UT was 2004 and thats 3 years old at this stage, looks like arse, and plays like any other run n gun deathmatch shooter.

....................................,.-‘”...................` `~.,..............
.............................,.-”............................ .......“-.,.........
.........................,/.................................. .............”:,....
.....................,?...................................... ................\,..
.................../......................................... ..................,}
................./........................................... ...........,:`^`..}.
.............../............................................. ......,:”........./.
..............?.....__....................................... ..:`.........../....
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:` ........../.......
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`.... ...._/..........
..........{.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,},.~”;/... .}..........
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”......... ...../..........
...,,,___.\`~,......“~.,....................`.....}.......... ..../............
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(...... ;_,,-”..............
............/.`~,......`-...............................\.... ../\................
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./ .....\,__...........
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|.. ............`=~-,....
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\..... ...................
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\. ....................
................................`:,,......................... ..`\..............__
.....................................`=-,..................., %`>--==``......
........................................_\..........._,-%.... ...`\...............

FFS...****ing fanboys.

EDIT
also the fact that you spelt 'Pr0' with a zero instead of an O completely negates anything you have to say on this matter, ever.

L31mr0d

0ubliette wrote: »

ranty mcrant rant

still doesn't change the fact that

PC > Console... with a cherry on top *booyah*

sprinkles

papu wrote: »

PC > CONSOEL

no seriously , consolers may have some skill , but its confined within the ranks of their own relm , joypad is great and all , but mouse and keyboard is better.

anyways , sales dont mean one thing is better than the other.they sell more bicycles than cars doesnt mean that bicycles go faster.

That's a retarded statement. Faster doesn't mean better so the metaphor isn't even right.

Anyway my 2 cents;

Consoles produce more accessable games designed for a range of gamers - casual to hardcore. There is a vast amount of classic games that are only available on consoles - Zelda/mario etc and for this reason alone I think it's pepsterous to say that PC>Consoles.

The only point that I keep hearing is that the keyboard & Mouse is better than the joypad. For certain games that's correct but that doesn't make tha game a bad one - and it certainly doesn't mean the console is worse than the pc - there's plenty of games that work perfectly on consoles without the need for a keyboard/mouse.

Right - FLAME ON people

papu

L31mr0d wrote: »

still doesn't change the fact that

PC > Console... with a cherry on top *booyah*

qft , also

That's a retarded statement.

no you!

Faster doesn't mean better so the metaphor isn't even right.

yes i this context it does.

Consoles produce more accessable games designed for a range of gamers - casual to hardcore. There is a vast amount of classic games that are only available on consoles - Zelda/mario etc and for this reason alone I think it's pepsterous to say that PC>Consoles.

:eek:

That's a retarded statement.

with the all mighty inturnetz u can download this thing called an emulator? which means you can play anygame ever made ( within reason) on one machine , the pc....

The only point that I keep hearing is that the keyboard & Mouse is better than the joypad. For certain games that's correct but that doesn't make tha game a bad one - and it certainly doesn't mean the console is worse than the pc - there's plenty of games that work perfectly on consoles without the need for a keyboard/mouse.

no joypads are great , if you wanna play fighting/sports games, or midlessly mash buttons , another great console invention mashing!

mouse's can change sensitivity in game have as many buttons as you 360 controller and doesnt give you a numb hand.

Gears of war (thats right, consoles had it a year before PC

yeah cause that games great , duck and cover , shoot , duck shoot , cover some more , run and shoot , duck behind some cover , shoot some ducks behind a cover .

seriously ive played it , it doesn't hold a wet rag to crysis ...oh thats right ...Crysis...
the best looking game of all time...pc exclusive....yeah....

Azza

Keyboard and mouse is going be a personal preference. But say if 1 person puts in the same effort into mastering a game on a joypad and another puts the same effort into the keyboard and mouse its almost a certainty the player using the keryboard and mouse would comfortable beat him in a 2 player deathmatch game. not about skill its just the keyboard and mouse is much more responsive giving player 2 in this case a massive advantage.

I have no evidence to back this up but going on a hunch that someone using a PC would also invest in a joypad for say a sports game (PES/FIFA)or a joystick for a flight sim while a console player if he had the option of using a keyboard and mouse/joystick would stick with the joypad for every type of game be it sports, fps rts etc. Not always but probably in the majority of cases I would say the previous statement to be true.

Still think over the years the PC edges out any 1 console in terms of A list games. I'd put this down primarily to its dominance of the online market.
Not saying consoles don't have some stellar games though
.
Also as mentioned before in this thread emulation allows the playing of lots of console games right up to the Playstation and Dreamcast era and even some PS2 games. Also you can emulate arcade games on a PC.
You can also do this with the PSP's as well now but I'd guess people doing it have a background in PC's.

In response to 0ubliette. You can get many of those great games you have on PC, such as Dirt, Bioshock and Gears of War on PC. I'm not a big fan of Halo series having played Halo 1 on the PC (its does not have co-op on pc) the single player I found very average. I also have Halo 2 on PC but not played it yet as its a Vista exclusive. From what I have played I personal can't see where the hype comes from as its mutiplayer seems tame compared to alot of PC online games. Though I will admit I would like to play Mass Affect and Ace Combat 6 though. Assassins Creed will be out in a month or so on PC so will pick it up then. Personal the Xbox 360 is the least of the 3 consoles to inspire (odd considering most people reckon it has the best line up of games)

As for UT3 it was released in a unfinished state. The gameplay is still good but it suffers from 4 major problems. The late release of Linux servers have kept server numbers down. The UI is pretty poor as are the current crop of maps. Advertisement for the game was almost non existent. They might be reserving there efforts for the console release but I can't see console players have a interest in such a deathmatch type game. Games like UT are no longer the norm as most online shooters have switched to more realistic type play like COD, DOD:S, CS:S or Battlefield. Even Quake Wars does not have the exaggerated movement and is focused on team play. I'd take issue with your statement its "another run and gun shooter". The last game released like it on PC was Quake 4 thats like 2 years ago.

Papu what you got against Gears of War. I found it to be a brilliant game played through it on co-op on the PC, found it great fun just as I did when I tried on the Xbox 360 before. Decent graphics and sound. Great atmosphere and great gameplay but was a little thin on the story side.

Crysis on the other hand was a disappointment wasn't terrible but was merely an average game coupled with great graphics. Also its expected that a slightly watered down graphically version will make an appearance on consoles some time.

conzy

0ubliette wrote: »

also the fact that you spelt 'Pr0' with a zero instead of an O completely negates anything you have to say on this matter, ever.

lol? sarcasm is great....

Anyway, nobody has countered any of my points yet. just kept saying how great Halo3 is? Hmmmmm

So the greater control and visual quality of PC games isnt worth writing home about?

Also, BioShock, Dirt, Assasins Creed, bla bla bla are all on PC....

FPS on a pc > console...

Maybe if you want to collect stars with a plumber a console is better......

papu

Azza wrote: »

Papu what you got against Gears of War. I found it to be a brilliant game played through it on co-op on the PC, found it great fun just as I did when I tried on the Xbox 360 before. Decent graphics and sound. Great atmosphere and great gameplay but was a little thin on the story side.

Crysis on the other hand was a disappointment wasn't terrible but was merely an average game coupled with great graphics. Also its expected that a slightly watered down graphically version will make an appearance on consoles some time.

i guess we have different preferences , i found what i played of gow repetitive and consoley , i found it quite a bad port ;/

i found crysis superb , fantastic graphics it really took off at the second half , really immersing gameplay

Azza

Gears of War from a graphical point of view on the PC is better than the console equivelent and adds in some minor additional content. I will admit it was extremely buggy though. If it gets some patches to resolve its issues it will be marginally superior to the console version. Thought the gameplay was very satisfying and thats why it got away without showing a lot of verity.

Crysis I found had a poor second half after a decent if unspectacular first half.
I found the ropey AI kept breaking the immersion factor for me. Its story was also solid but unspectacular. The destructible environments did not really add a lot to the gameplay in my opinion. Forget they where their after a while.