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

papu

steviec wrote: »

Playing with real friends on the couch will always be superior to playing with people on the internet in my opinion. No amount of communications tools will make up for that.

and playing with real friends at a lan on your own rig , on your own monitor will always be superior than playing on a couch with 4 people on split screen:rolleyes:

robby^5

papu wrote: »

and playing with real friends at a lan on your own rig , on your own monitor will always be superior than playing on a couch with 4 people on split screen:rolleyes:

Going to a LAN is a lot more effort that bringing a controller round to a mates house.

And LANs are only attended by a minority of gamers.

papu

robby^5 wrote: »

COUGH, let me rephrase that....

Console = 4 people at once on the same console in the same room enjoying one anothers company

PC = 1 person, alone sure talking with people on TS or whatever, but its not the same.

Thus there a far more social aspect to consoles, i wouldnt call talking ot people on Vent socialising.

do you have four people by all the time to play console?

it is just as easy to get 4 pc gamers together than 4 consolers.

Going to a LAN is a lot more effort that bringing a controller round to a mates house.

And LANs are only attended by a minority of gamers.

no it isnt , pc , router lan cables , + lan setups are usually left up overnight + filesharing and whut not... and yes , but 200 people > 4 people

and id prefer to game on my 22" monitor , than a quarter of some tv

steviec

papu wrote: »

no it isnt , pc , router lan cables , + lan setups are usually left up overnight + filesharing and whut not

That's easier than picking up a joypad? Really?

papu

its not a whole much harder , that joypad is massive!

for that matter , you can lan with laptops over wireless networks so :P

robby^5

papu wrote: »

do you have four people by all the time to play console?

Yep, friends on XBox live just like with PC's, or my mates can come down to my house with a controller anytime and play, without having to dismantle, reassemble and find space for 3 other pc's in my house

papu wrote: »

it is just as easy to get 4 pc gamers together than 4 consolers.

Not by a longshot dude, your lying to yourself. Unless your going to tell me your mates all bring their rigs over to yours on a Friday night for a few games...you can play online all you want, but want i'm talking about is a social element PC gaming lacks.

papu wrote: »

no it isnt , pc , router lan cables , + lan setups are usually left up overnight + filesharing and whut not... and yes , but 200 people > 4 people

Take PC + Peripherals away from desk = effort, transport it all to a LAN = effort, 24 hours of gaming is always fun and I love LANS too but its not as easy as even having a console lan.

I wouldnt call dragging my rig over to a friends house as easy as bringing over a controller.

papu wrote: »

its not a whole much harder , that joypad is massive!

for that matter , you can lan with laptops over wireless networks so :P

Lan with laptops wow.


Oh and back to my point about controllers being harder to use, go play Halo 3 and see how many headshots some guys get, which as most of you know is frikkin hard with analog sticks, whereas while it does take skill to play all games, i would argue aiming in MOST fps games is easier with a mouse and keyboard. Obviously this is due to a mouse being a little more intuitive than the anolog stick, but still it doesnt take away from the fact that it takes a lot of skill to get really good using a joypad.

papu

Not by a longshot dude, your lying to yourself. Unless your going to tell me your mates all bring their rigs over to yours on a Friday night for a few games...you can play online all you want, but want i'm talking about is a social element PC gaming lacks.

no i can get 5 other people to bring their pc's on friday , and stay till sat evening.

I wouldnt call dragging my rig over to a friends house as easy as bringing over a controller.

no but its more rewarding , again 22" screen > 1/4 of a tv.

Oh and back to my point about controllers being harder to use, go play Halo 3 and see how many headshots some guys get, which as most of you know is frikkin hard with analog sticks, whereas while it does take skill to play all games, i would argue aiming in MOST fps games is easier with a mouse and keyboard. Obviously this is due to a mouse being a little more intuitive than the anolog stick, but still it doesnt take away from the fact that it takes a lot of skill to get really good using a joypad.

back to the point of autoaim on consoles , i could pick up a joypad an do fairly well against halo3 players , i did this during gamecon. joypads have a learning curve of figuring out the buttons.

conzy

Analogue sticks are extremely inaccurate and only work because of the auto aim or "aim assist" or whatever you want to call it....

A mouse has per pixel accuracy, so the chances of missing are a LOT more than they are with an analogue stick... FPS on a console is so slow and boring. I am not exageating when i say it takes like half a second to turn around...

Console fps is just so handicapped and basic compared to PC fps....

And 4 players using one screen is just LOL, you can just glance and see where the opponent is and you get a nice 320*240 gaming experience and a HUGE 640*360 experience if you have a HDTV :eek:

Azza

With regards mobility consoles are abit more friendly to move around to a mates gaff and to get working. A little bit tricky if you want to network them locally to avoid split screening which does detract quite abit from some games.

Its the pick up and play ability that is a key factor for consoles it just so much less hassle at times. No worries about firewalls, network cards not being detected, windows crashing, drivers and patches etc.
You can get pretty good at setting up PC's if your experienced enough and in time if you prepare your machine right you can cut down alot of hassle. But they can be alot more troublesome at times no doubt about it.
If you do get it working you can do more stuff like file sharing and watch TV programs etc on you pc.

As much fun as the console is with your friends around and you might be having more craic as your friends are there to be slagged of, humilated in person etc
from a gaming point of view the sheer number of players online in PC gaming makes the games more enjoyable. You will in all honesty not have the numbers sitting around your house with consoles nor do you have the quality of mutiplayer games. Not saying they are bad games and they still are fun, just you have better games and a gaming experience (maybe not the social experience you have with the mates around but it can still be fun) from a mutiplayer point of view on the PC.

robby^5

papu wrote: »

no i can get 5 other people to bring their pc's on friday , and stay till sat evening.

I'm sorry but I very much doubt that'd be something you'd do regularly, if you do, you're part of a huge minority and fair play to you.

Overall, people dont do that man, but millions and millions of people do play stuff liek Wii sports together regularly.

papu wrote: »

no but its more rewarding , again 22" screen > 1/4 of a tv.

Well tbh I'm not picky, because its fun to play with friends, screen size doesnt really matter, but a lot of people (including myself) are getting big hd lcd's which are awesome for multiplayer.

papu

Its the pick up and play ability that is a key factor for consoles it just so much less hassle at times. No worries about firewalls, network cards not being detected, windows crashing, drivers and patches etc.

that sounds like a pretty fail lan , although all those issues could be sorted within 30mins a a few reboots. people who know Nothing about pc's will not even attempt a lan without a experianced lanner around

. even saying that the sheer amout of games at the pc's disposal at lans is hundreds of times greater than or any console. lans can be ruined by anything , especially when your xbox redrings...a real lan killer...

papu

robby^5 wrote: »

I'm sorry but I very much doubt that'd be something you'd do regularly, if you do, you're part of a huge minority and fair play to you.

Overall, people dont do that man, but millions and millions of people do play stuff liek Wii sports together regularly.



Well tbh I'm not picky, because its fun to play with friends, screen size doesnt really matter, but a lot of people (including myself) are getting big hd lcd's which are awesome for multiplayer.

yes we have about a dozen gamers in kilkenny who hold 6-12 people lans every few weeks depending on school and such .

also omg @ tv , unless you buy a fricken 80" hd tv screen size and res will suck major time. 37" hdtv = a whole 9" of tv space , which by the screen/far away from screen ratio means you would have to be 36" away from the tv... nowai

conzy

These PC "issues" that PC talk about don't exist!!

omg Patches
omg Network cards
omg crashes

PC gamers dont have these issues because they are well... PC gamers? Everything has a learning curve, granted PCs do have a bigger learning curve than consoles, but thats because its a more sophisticated machine...

I know how to download a patch, i know how to setup a lan, and I rarely experience crashes that aren't my fault (blowing up 3000 barrels :P )

Its like saying why doesn't everyone just ride bicycles! There is a smaller learning curve, its less likely to break and its more social!!!!!! Does this mean its better than a car? or bicycle users are better than car users? NO!

tman

papu wrote: »

yes we have about a dozen gamers in kilkenny who hold 6-12 people lans every few weeks depending on school and such .

also omg @ tv , unless you buy a fricken 80" hd tv screen size and res will suck major time. 37" hdtv = a whole 9" of tv space , which by the screen/far away from screen ratio means you would have to be 36" away from the tv... nowai

37" would be the diagonal size of a screen, so if you split it 4 ways, each player would have 18.5" of the screen...
This thread is a ****ing joke. Can't people just accept that both console gaming and PC gaming both have their own pros and cons, and are BOTH superb fun in their own ways?

Blowfish

tman wrote:

This thread is a ****ing joke. Can't people just accept that both console gaming and PC gaming both have their own pros and cons, and are BOTH superb fun in their own ways?

Judging by previous threads like these, that's never going to happen.

papu

it may be 18.5" but only a maximum res of 640*360 . so you loose your high definition

and even on the ps3 in full 1080p its only 960*540.

and those res's are standered on a 12" or 15" pc monitor

Ciaran500

papu wrote: »

it may be 18.5" but only a maximum res of 640*360 . so you loose your high definition

and even on the ps3 in full 1080p its only 960*540.

and those res's are standered on a 12" or 15" pc monitor

You lose definition in return for convenience.

This thread has gone way OT and down a pointless and well worn path.

Kiith

tman wrote: »

Can't people just accept that both console gaming and PC gaming both have their own pros and cons, and are BOTH superb fun in their own ways?

That would be the rational thing to do...so no chance its going to happen.

conzy

/me awaits the arrival of his PS3 from santy

papu

/ hugs my xbox media centre

AlmightyCushion

Just thought I'd add my thoughts on this. Me and my friends regularly set up a lan on our laptops which is really easy to setup. I prefer this to console multiplayer because of the reason stated above you have a separate monitor instead of sharing a tv screen. Also because you have separate screens you can't see what the other person is doing. Nothing like sneaking up behind someone and shooting them in the back of the head. On a console all they would have to do is look at your part of the screen and figure out where you are.

On the argument that gaming pcs are more expensive than consoles. This is true. One thing though, if I was to buy a new computer tomorrow (not for gaming), I would be getting a fairly good one. Decent processor, 2GBs ram and a nice monitor. If I wanted to turn that into a pretty sweet gaming pc all I would have to do is buy an 8800gt. That costs about €250. This computer would be superior to a ps3 or xbox 360 and all it cost me was an extra €250 odd euro.

Given the fact that new console games cost in the region of €70 whereas a new pc game costs in the region of €50 then the graphics card nearly pays for itself.

conzy

very good points

I mean everyone posting here obviously has a pc, that cost in the region of 1000 euro and for that money or slightly more money you can make a great gaming rig....

mcgovern

conzymaher wrote: »

These PC "issues" that PC talk about don't exist!!

omg Patches
omg Network cards
omg crashes

PC gamers dont have these issues because they are well... PC gamers? Everything has a learning curve, granted PCs do have a bigger learning curve than consoles, but thats because its a more sophisticated machine...

I know how to download a patch, i know how to setup a lan, and I rarely experience crashes that aren't my fault (blowing up 3000 barrels :P )

Its like saying why doesn't everyone just ride bicycles! There is a smaller learning curve, its less likely to break and its more social!!!!!! Does this mean its better than a car? or bicycle users are better than car users? NO!

Just because as an experienced PC user you know how to deal with these problems, doesn't mean that say for example a family with a 10yr old kid do.
And even knowing how to fix them does not banish them, they do still exist.

And as for needing a PC woth €1k to post here, what are you smoking?
And thats leaving out the fact that I'm sure alot of people post from work etc.

conzy

omg you keep trying to poke holes in my posts and fail miserably every time....

I never said go and buy a 10 year old kid a PC. I said that myself and millions of others manage just fine with our broken difficult to use PCs.... and as an "experienced" pc gamer. typing "cod4 patch" into google and clicking ok twice is not a traumatic experience anymore....

I didnt say your PC cost 1k, but that is about average, maybe slightly less these days.... ANYWAY my point was that a lot of people have capable gaming machines or machines that could be made into gaming rigs already and that it isn't a huge investment........

have a nice day

mcgovern

conzymaher wrote: »

omg you keep trying to poke holes in my posts and fail miserably every time....

I never said go and buy a 10 year old kid a PC. I said that myself and millions of others manage just fine with our broken difficult to use PCs.... and as an "experienced" pc gamer. typing "cod4 patch" into google and clicking ok twice is not a traumatic experience anymore....

I didnt say your PC cost 1k, but that is about average, maybe slightly less these days.... ANYWAY my point was that a lot of people have capable gaming machines or machines that could be made into gaming rigs already and that it isn't a huge investment........

have a nice day

I'm failing? I've proved you were wrong at least 10 times now.
Average cost of PCs these days is probably closer to €700-800 than €1k.
Thats obviously better for your arguement except that most people who don't know what they are buying or who are not buying with the intention of playing games on it, are getting machines with no slots for upgrades etc and certainly not SLI capable machines etc.
One of the reasons there are less PC gamers than their used to be is because of the patches etc that are needed that is an issue that a lot of people don't want to have to deal with.
And a lot of people with PCs that could be turned into gaming rigs don't know a) what graphics cards are decent and which aren't. b) what type of RAM/Graphics card they would need to upgrade their machine to a gaming rig and c) where to put them when they got them.

These are all very valid points when you realise that the gaming community at large is not entirely comprised of 15-40 yr old, tech savvy males anymore.
Hence more people buy consoles, hence more games are bought on consoles and less on PCs which is the topic of the thread.

thelordofcheese

steviec wrote: »

Playing with real friends on the couch will always be superior to playing with people on the internet in my opinion. No amount of communications tools will make up for that.

True, plus no-one can complain about lag then

Creamy Goodness

thelordofcheese wrote: »

True, plus no-one can complain about lag then

what about the fps slowdown that happens when playing fps multiplayer?

conzy

mcgovern wrote: »

I'm failing? I've proved you were wrong at least 10 times now.
Average cost of PCs these days is probably closer to €700-800 than €1k.
Thats obviously better for your arguement except that most people who don't know what they are buying or who are not buying with the intention of playing games on it, are getting machines with no slots for upgrades etc and certainly not SLI capable machines etc.
One of the reasons there are less PC gamers than their used to be is because of the patches etc that are needed that is an issue that a lot of people don't want to have to deal with.
And a lot of people with PCs that could be turned into gaming rigs don't know a) what graphics cards are decent and which aren't. b) what type of RAM/Graphics card they would need to upgrade their machine to a gaming rig and c) where to put them when they got them.

These are all very valid points when you realise that the gaming community at large is not entirely comprised of 15-40 yr old, tech savvy males anymore.
Hence more people buy consoles, hence more games are bought on consoles and less on PCs which is the topic of the thread.

ha sli......

Again you fail because PC Gamers know whether or not their machine has a pci-express slot? Like I said PC gaming isn't for everyone, and those that aren't able for it should just buy a console, but those who are able for it can reap the rewards... It isn't complicated I mean back to the bicycle analogy, A car seems a lot more complex to use at first, but once you know how, its a lot better than a bike.....


Oh and btw, XBL is down atm

OctavarIan

I would rank multiplayer gaming experiences like this:

1. Console multiplayer with a tv and console for each player
2. PC multiplayer at home with one pc
3. Console multiplayer with everyone on the same tv

Not sure where I'd rank PC LAN events since I've never been to one before, but it would probably be top. I'm a PC gamer and I agree that PCs are a lot of hassle for the average gamer. Average gamer just wants to turn console on and play every time, not encounter error messages, crashes etc. That said given the choice between PC and console, I'd choose PC every time.

papu

OctavarIan wrote: »

I would rank multiplayer gaming experiences like this:

1. Console multiplayer with a tv and console for each player
2. PC multiplayer at home with one pc
3. Console multiplayer with everyone on the same tv

Not sure where I'd rank PC LAN events since I've never been to one before, but it would probably be top. I'm a PC gamer and I agree that PCs are a lot of hassle for the average gamer. Average gamer just wants to turn console on and play every time, not encounter error messages, crashes etc. That said given the choice between PC and console, I'd choose PC every time.

if that happens everytime you wanna play a game , there is somthing seriously wrong , thats like like getting into the car and the steering wheel falls off .

90% of those error messages crash's ect are user based , if you give someone an xbox and tell them go so set it up , register on xbl and play a game , to parent or a 10year old kid thats a no go tbh