Why do you guys bother with PC gaming?

[SirPauly]

When a poster or individuals simply offers, I can just turn it on and be done with it, translates to the polar opposite of what makes a PC gamer -- the flexibility.

I think consoles will eventually all be PC's -- and will slowly fade over time.

 

[happy medium]

So does that mean we won't see you on the forums by 2013 when Xbox Loop (Xbox 720) is released

I'm bored with gaming in general, thats why you don't see me as much allready.

 

[RussianSensation]

1. You put "without monitor" in bold, last I checked consoles don't come with a TV.

Most households have a TV. Most households do not have a PC monitor. Gaming on a 50-60 inch plasma is 10x better than a crappy 23 inch PC monitor.

2. 4GB of ram was about 30$ back then. It shot way up, then went back down to 30$ again.

No way 4GB of DDR2-800 ram was $30 in 2005-2006.

3. With the exception of the 8800GTS, everything else you already owned. I could put an 8800GTS into my mom's PC and it would have become a gaming PC.

That's me. But people who right now are trying to decide: consolve vs. desktop gaming PC don't have a monitor, don't have a desktop. Even if they do have a desktop, it's probably already obsolete. Back then when Xbox360 came out, it cost way more to upgrade your PC parts than to get a console.

4. This isn't a "comparable" system its a system that VASTLY outperforms it. The 8800GTS 640mb is amazingly better than whats in the PS3 and xbox360.

Ya right. Look at the amount of optimization on consoles. Does Portal 2 look way better on PC than PS3? Does BF: BC2 look way better on PC? What about all the awesome console exclusive? Maybe you don't care for the best sports games, the best racing games, the best platform or fighting games? I do and I can't play them on the PC!

You are forgetting that unless all you play are strategy and FPS games and WOW, or some very niche segment like flight sims (which BTW is completely dead on the PC), then a PC gaming platform doesn't have much that attracts gamers who want a variety of games. I game on the PC for FPS and strategy and some role-playing games. Am I going to get the next 2 expansions for SC2? For sure. Diablo 3, check. BF3 - no don't care for MP FPS online games. But what if I want the best racing games? Forza 4 or Gran Turismo or the best platformers such God of War or Uncharted series? Oh wait a second, those gems aren't sold no the PC. I am not about to miss out on some amazing games just to save $300 on NOT owning a console....just so I can go around forums and say console games are for "kiddies" or "noobs" or "nerfed."

 

[RussianSensation]

You are right, I can fire up Civ5, Total War, WoW, SC2 and Might and Magic Heroes IV and ditch my PC for a cheap PS3!

Oh wait ...

Good games, but if someone doesn't like RTS or turn-based strategy games? Oh wait......that can't be the case for millions of console gamers can it? I own a PC and I have no interest to play WOW, ever. I have no interest in paying $15 / month x 12 months x 6 years ($1080) for any game. Or it can't be the case that I can play all those on my PC with a $150 graphics card and play everything else the PC doesn't have on a console? I suddenly have to be a PC only gamer because otherwise I am a console 'noob'? I didn't know to be a serious gamer you had to own the only manly platform - the PC.

 

[SirPauly]

I think it is great to have the choice of gaming in many, many platforms from mobile, tablet, laptop, desktop, console, monitor, displays for the living room to projectors. If one is satisfied and pleased by any of these methods -- happy for them but the key to me is flexibility of choice to meet the demands of individual's subjective tastes, tolerances and wallet size. As long as one is enjoying their content -- I'm happy for them.

 

[RussianSensation]

I think it is great to have the choice of gaming in many, many platforms from mobile, tablet, laptop, desktop, console, monitor, displays for the living room to projectors. If one is satisfied and pleased by any of these methods -- happy for them but the key to me is flexibility of choice to meet the demands of individual's subjective tastes, tolerances and wallet size. As long as one is enjoying their content -- I'm happy for them.

:thumbsup: Put it this way, Dice selling millions more copies of BF3 on consoles may make BF4 even better on the PC since they'll have an even bigger budget for the sequel. As long as developers prioritize PC games, I have no problems with PC games being sold on consoles too. I just wish we had more exclusives on the PC.

 

[SirPauly]

Good games, but if someone doesn't like RTS or turn-based strategy games? Oh wait......that can't be the case for millions of console gamers can it? I own a PC and I have no interest to play WOW, ever. I have no interest in paying $15 / month x 12 months x 6 years ($1080) for any game. Or it can't be the case that I can play all those on my PC with a $150 graphics card and play everything else the PC doesn't have on a console? I suddenly have to be a PC only gamer because otherwise I am a console 'noob'? I didn't know to be a serious gamer you had to own the only manly platform - the PC.

I thought the same way at first about WoW but it was actually quite entertaining with new content added -- unique and welcomed experience, with great art work, depth and imaginations.

 

[lehtv]

Most households have a TV. Most households do not have a PC monitor. Gaming on a 50-60 inch plasma is 10x better than a crappy 23 inch PC monitor.

What a load of bull. How is it better at all? Plasma TVs have terrible response time compared to PC monitors, and a PC monitor viewed from 2 feet away will probably fill more of your field of vision than a plasma TV viewed from your couch, giving a better gaming experience.

Also, most households do not have a 50-60 inch plasma TV. They have a TV, yes, but not a 50-60 incher.

 

[taltamir]

Most households have a TV. Most households do not have a PC monitor. Gaming on a 50-60 inch plasma is 10x better than a crappy 23 inch PC monitor.

1. Wrong, almost all households have BOTH a TV and a PC with a monitor (actually I don't have a TV and I know some people without one, or both; but its rare). And 60 inch plasma in every household? seriously? And the notion that households will have a massive expensive top of the line TV and no PC is ridiculous.
2. You can plug a PC to a TV, add in wireless mouse + keyboard or a wireless game controller and you have one awesome gaming machine.

I used to have a projector giving me a 150 inch display... you haven't played starcraft until you played it on 150 inch display.

No way 4GB of DDR2-800 ram was $30 in 2005-2006.

Yes way. Market over-saturation.

That's me. But people who right now are trying to decide: consolve vs. desktop gaming PC don't have a monitor, don't have a desktop. Even if they do have a desktop, it's probably already obsolete. Back then when Xbox360 came out, it cost way more to upgrade your PC parts than to get a console.

It never cost more to upgrade your PC than a console. I redo the math about yearly.
As for "already obsolete"... my 80 year old accountant? He has a top of the line i7 which he constantly get upgraded (he knows jack, he just buys new ones because he wants it fast). He doesn't play video games.
My 50+ year old mother? She also only uses beefy desktops because she hates waiting. (speaking of, she also bought HERSELF a nice new 24 inch monitor without consulting anyone)
My brothers? ditto.
My 70 year old neighbor? ditto.

Some people have ancient PCs, yes... my maternal grandfather does his email on a PC from 2002. But most people upgrade their machines semi regularly because they don't like waiting 10 minutes for word to open.

Ya right. Look at the amount of optimization on consoles. Does Portal 2 look way better on PC than PS3? Does BF: BC2 look way better on PC?

I just looked at BF3 and yes they look better on PC... my god you can really see the AA/lack of AA in that game. And you can tell they did 0 optimization for PC, just allowed it to run AA (which is code supplied by nvidia and AMD anyways). A proper PC game will look even better.
As for portal2, its a 35 min video. I skipped through and at no point does it show a side by side of PC/console. I lucked out and saw a bit where they SAID it looks "comparable on all platforms" but then later on I saw bits which were clearly console due to complete lack of AA (which was visible in that early PC demo section).

You seem to confuse certain multi platform games under utilizing the PC as "looking amazing thanks to console optimization"... they get crap FPS on console and look quite meh. Console graphics haven't really moved much with the exception of sacrificing resolution and rendering smoothness for image quality. So you take such an underachieving game and port it to PC without improvements and you get the same lackluster graphics only with better FPS, higher res, and AA tacked on... it is only a small improvement, but still an improvement. And it is so much more in games that actually bother to do things properly on the PC port.

What about all the awesome console exclusive?

1. There is no such thing as a "console exclusive". What you have is an Xbox360 exclusive, a PS3 exclusive, a wii exclusive, an iphone exclusive, or a PC exclusive.
Games are either multi platform, or single platform. Well, there is the rare occasional PC excluding title, where a company says "PC users are all pirates so no PC version!"... but that is just the occasional bout of stupidity (as they forget how rampant piracy is on consoles)
2. There are exclusives for EVERY platform. There is no point having a pissing contest over who has the better exclusives, it doesn't matter. If exclusives matter to you then you must get ALL platforms anyways.
3. Point 2 only applies when it is POSSIBLE to make a game multi platform. Many games are PC exclusives not by desire but by necessity. Because no console offers a mouse and keyboard. You can port any game that MUST have a controller to a PC and then use a controller on the PC. You cannot port WoW to a console until they let you use a wireless mouse and keyboard with it (and if they did ALLOW it then you could port WoW)... Allow is the key word, there is no hardware limitation preventing you from using a mouse and keyboard on a console.

Maybe you don't care for the best sports games, the best racing games, the best platform or fighting games? I do and I can't play them on the PC!

Actually I don't care for those games, at all. But that is still a BS argument as the PC is perfectly capable of running such games if allowed to.

 

[Stuka87]

Most households have a TV. Most households do not have a PC monitor. Gaming on a 50-60 inch plasma is 10x better than a crappy 23 inch PC monitor.

Wait, most households have 50-60" Plasmas?! Boy, guess I am in the minority then, along with just about everybody that I know.

And personally, I rather sit 2.5ft from a 23" HD display then 12-15ft back from a 50" HD display. Not only are things far sharper on the smaller display due to pixel size and density, but it fill more of my vision.

Oh, and please, show me a house that has a 50-60" Plasma but doesn't own a computer with a monitor. I mean are they using punch cards or what?! Surfing facebook without a display has got to be tough.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Can you play Diablo 3 on your PS3? ohhhh... you can't lol! Maybe you hate the new model Diablo 3 is using for the experience, but you have to admit it will be one very hot selling title among many.

Also try playing Dragoin Age on a controller. It's cumbersome to say the least. On a PC you have so many hot keys. Also Skyrim will be best on PC. You know there will be mods out for the PC version in time just as Oblivion had.

 

[marmasatt]

I actually agree w/ the OP's sentiments. At a glance they appear a bit incendiary - like he is trolling. But I consider myself a PC Gamer first. However, the last two or so years, I've been buying games that I've been waiting for on the 360 first, then the PC. I think the reasons are many, but first of all, titles are just looking fantastic on the console. It is simply amazing what they can do on 5 year old hardware. Frankly, I don't get it. I just don't understand how they are able to reach the graphical capability on hardware that is like the equivalent of a 2006 PC. Baffling. Titles like Battlefield 2, Crysis 2, Rage, Dead Space, Forza, etc are just awesome. Gaming on a 50" plasma is pure bliss. Second of all, the used pc game market is like now non existent. It seems you can't resell anything anymore. I figure if I drop $40/$45 on a console game, I'm at least going to get $25/$30 so long as I turn it over within a couple of months - more if I turn it over sooner. I am almost exclusively an FPS guy, and I never in a million years thought I could master a controller. However, it's now like second nature. All the games have roughly the same controls. So once you master the actual controller, you can basically play any game out there.....

 

[RussianSensation]

What a load of bull. How is it better at all? Plasma TVs have terrible response time compared to PC monitors,

You can't be serious? Plasma is by FAR superior in response/refresh rate, black levels, color accuracy. LEDs have an inherent flaw that they can't properly produce reds or greens and have a bluish tint. It's no wonder Plasma has been preferable for sports and movies for years by videophiles all over the world. In regard to response time, plasma pixels have an almost instantaneous response time:

"A Plasma panel display has near instantaneous response times on the order of 0.002 milliseconds."
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1246234

You should really educate yourself before posting FUD. Plasma has no ghosting, ever. You may be confusing specific TV set's input lag with response time.

and a PC monitor viewed from 2 feet away will probably fill more of your field of vision than a plasma TV viewed from your couch, giving a better gaming experience.

You are joking right? A 60 inch plasma vs. a 23-24 inch PC monitor. People who game on a 60 inch plasma see guns that are as large as they are in real life (or close to it). If you game on a larger monitor, you experience objects that are much larger in size, much more in line with their real world size. Also, who games on a 50-60 inch TV 2 feet away? Also, Plasma has superior viewing angles to an LCD.

Also, most households do not have a 50-60 inch plasma TV. They have a TV, yes, but not a 50-60 incher.

Most households have TVs in US, and I bet today, most households have 37-42 inch TVs of LCD/LED or Plasma variety.

To me even a 37-40 inch TV offers a more immersive gaming experience than a 23-24 inch PC monitor. A 24 inch PC monitor doesn't even have a resolution advantage. There is no comparison to me. I even had the option of buying a 30 inch PC monitor for the same price as my LCD. But I prefer to game on a larger monitor; and I know a lot of people who play consoles like gaming on a large screen too.

Outside of contrast level and power consumption, modern plasmas are superior to any LCD/LED in every metric imaginable. Black levels are also critical for games that have darker settings like Metro 2033, Doom 3, Dead Space, etc.

You my friend have some serious misconceptions about Plasma technology.

Can you play games on a 23-24 inch PC monitor with a group of friends? What about on a 50-60 inch Plasma?

Have you ever fired up Battlefield 3 or any other PC game on a 50 inch Plasma? The graphics and immersion blows a tiny 23 inch PC monitor out of the water!

 

[RussianSensation]

Wait, most households have 50-60" Plasmas?! Boy, guess I am in the minority then, along with just about everybody that I know.

And 60 inch plasma in every household? seriously?

From my post, when did I say specifically that most households have 60 inch Plasmas?

I said most households have a TV. I never said most households have 50-60 inch Plasmas. Then I said, it's also better to game on a 50-60 inch Plasma than on a tiny 23 inch monitor. The 2 statements are separate.

50-60 inch TVs are now pretty affordable too!

2. You can plug a PC to a TV, add in wireless mouse + keyboard or a wireless game controller and you have one awesome gaming machine.

I don't want to have some ugly desktop PC in my living room with cables all over the place. I am sure your wife doesn't either. And what if I want to play games with 3-4 of my friends. How am I going to do that exactly with 1 PC in the living room? Should we set up a LAN party in my living room? :sneaky: I guess a typical PC gamer doesn't understand the idea of playing games with a group of friends?

It never cost more to upgrade your PC than a console. I redo the math about yearly.

Well the cost to upgrade a console is basically $0, unless you decide to get a larger hard drive.

So since 2005/2006, your out of pocket costs to upgrade your PC parts was less than $300-400? How did you manage that with a $300 i7, a $150+ SSD and a $200 videocard? But wait, you didn't have an i7 and GTX260 in 2006.

You are telling me you only spent $400 on all of your upgrades in the least 5 years?

But most people upgrade their machines semi regularly because they don't like waiting 10 minutes for word to open.

I would say most people replace their machines, not upgrade them. A typical desktop user doesn't even know what PCI Express is, or how to install an after market heatsink. Best Buy Geek Squad anyone?

You seem to confuse certain multi platform games under utilizing the PC as "looking amazing thanks to console optimization"... they get crap FPS on console and look quite meh.

As a PC / console gamer, to me gaming is not all about graphics.

Did you ever play:

- Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time?
- Super Mario 64?
- Mario Kart?
- Goldeneye 007?
- Super Mario Galaxy 1 / 2?
- Half Life 2?
- Starcraft 1? Warcraft 2?
- Star Wars: Tie Fighter?
- Portal 1?
- Super Mario Bros. 3?
- BioShock?
- Tetris?
- Streets of Rage 1/2?
- Double Dragon 2?
- Earthworm Jim 1/2?
- Panzer Dragoon Saga?
- Mortal Kombat 2?

etc.

None of the above listed PC/console games have good graphics by today's standards, but they sure are way better games that are fun to play than say AvP or Metro 2033.

1. There is no such thing as a "console exclusive". What you have is an Xbox360 exclusive, a PS3 exclusive, a wii exclusive, an iphone exclusive, or a PC exclusive.

When I said "console exclusive titles", it meant console specific franchisees that are not available on the PC. There are plenty of those and some of them are excellent games. Sure as hell better than a mindless hallway shooter like Doom 3 or Quake 4 with clay looking enemies and 0 storyline to speak of.

There are exclusives for EVERY platform. There is no point having a pissing contest over who has the better exclusives, it doesn't matter. If exclusives matter to you then you must get ALL platforms anyways.

Yes, but the best PC exclusives nowadays? Maybe 2-3 a year that are AAA titles, none of which are the best platformers, 3d adventure/hack and slash games, racing or fighting games. So if you don't care for those genres, sure, PC-only gaming is sufficient. If your favourite games are MMOs, FPS and strategy, then PC rules. No doubt.

Actually I don't care for those games, at all. But that is still a BS argument as the PC is perfectly capable of running such games if allowed to.

It's not a BS argument. The argument at hand is whether or not a PC is the superior gaming platform. By definition it can't be superior overall if it doesn't have the widest variety of genres since it automatically become a niche gaming platform that primarily caters to FPS, strategy, and role-playing/MMOs. But if you only play those 3 genres, then yes, it's superior for you. Obviously, at least more than half of gamers don't agree since consoles sell millions of units. It must be that people care to play sports, fighting, adventure/platform, hack and slash, and racing games.

It would be a sad world if the only types of games were military FPS games. Once you play 1 of those, you have played them all.

Can you play Diablo 3 on your PS3? ohhhh... you can't lol! Maybe you hate the new model Diablo 3 is using for the experience, but you have to admit it will be one very hot selling title among many.

Also try playing Dragoin Age on a controller. It's cumbersome to say the least. On a PC you have so many hot keys. Also Skyrim will be best on PC. You know there will be mods out for the PC version in time just as Oblivion had.

Some games are better on the PC. The ones you listed definitely provide a better exp. for the PC. What about Batman AA/AC with a keyboard and a mouse vs. an Xbox360 controller? What about Dirt 3 with a keyboard? Terrible.

 

[lehtv]

@RussianSensation

Sorry, I didn't mean response time, I meant input lag.

You are joking right? A 60 inch plasma vs. a 23-24 inch PC monitor. People who game on a 60 inch plasma see guns that are as large as they are in real life (or close to it). Also, who games on a 50-60 inch TV 2 feet away?

Of course I'm not joking. Are you joking about me joking? For a 50" 1080p TV to fill the same area of your field of vision as a 24" 1080p monitor at 2 feet away, the TV should be at about 4 feet away. Who the hell has a couch four feet from their 50 inch TV? LOL.

To me even a 37-40 inch TV offers a more immersive gaming experience over a 23-24 inch PC monitor.

And the opposite is the reason I prefer to game on my 27" monitor instead of my 51" plasma TV... Or would prefer, if I had a console

 

[taltamir]

To me even a 37-40 inch TV offers a more immersive gaming experience than a 23-24 inch PC monitor. A 24 inch PC monitor doesn't even have a resolution advantage. There is no comparison to me. I even had the option of buying a 30 inch PC monitor for the same price as my LCD. But I prefer to game on a larger monitor; and I know a lot of people who play consoles like gaming on a large screen too.

Moot point, monitors and TVs use the same connectors today.
I used to have a PC plugged to a TV. Nowadays my consoles are plugged into the same 24 inch monitor as my PC

It never cost more to upgrade your PC than a console. I redo the math about yearly.

Well the cost to upgrade a console is basically $0, unless you decide to get a larger hard drive.

To clarify the obivous:
It never cost more to upgrade your non gaming PC with a video card that is superior to a console, that it is to buy the console that the video card is superior to. I redo the math about yearly and it always comes in favor of the PC.

From my post, when did I say specifically that most households have 60 inch Plasmas?

Right here:

Most households have a TV. Most households do not have a PC monitor. Gaming on a 50-60 inch plasma is 10x better than a crappy 23 inch PC monitor.

I don't want to have some ugly desktop PC in my living room with cables all over the place. I am sure your wife doesn't either.

There is exactly the same cables going to both.
1 power cable. 1 HDMI cable. 1 ethernet cable (or wifi card). wireless controller or wireless keyboard and mouth (no cables)

And what if I want to play games with 3-4 of my friends. How am I going to do that exactly with 1 PC in the living room? Should we set up a LAN party in my living room? I guess a typical PC gamer doesn't understand the idea of playing games with a group of friends?

I actually do... online. It is true that split screen gaming is VERY rare on the PC though. Although I have played many hotseat TBS games over the years

You are telling me you only spent $400 on all of your upgrades in the least 5 years?

No, I am telling you that if I had put a 400$ 8800GTS 640MB in my mother's PC 5 years ago (she doesn't game) it would still be superior gaming machine to a PS3, and the PS3 came out 3 days after that card.

I have upgraded more... sometimes for gaming, sometimes cause I wanted more (I went from Q9400 to i7 not for games but for general performance). I kept my 7900GS until the 8800GTS 512MB came out for much cheaper.

I would say most people replace their machines, not upgrade them. A typical desktop user doesn't even know what PCI Express is, or how to install an after market heatsink. Best Buy Geek Squad anyone?

Replacing the machine IS upgrading it. You upgrade from a busty old machine to a new faster one. You can do part by part upgrades which are much cheaper... but require some technical knowledge. (this is what I do)

As a PC / console gamer, to me gaming is not all about graphics.

Of course it isn't all about the graphics. When choosing a game I don't even take graphics into account..
BUT, if I am buying a SPECIFIC game that has excellent gameplay and story, and I can buy that game in xbox, ps3, or PC... and the PC has the best graphics, followed by PS3, followed by xbox360. then I would rate those versions as PC > PS3 > xbox.
The PC graphic advantage doesn't mean PC gamers are drooling retards who buy crap games who look pretty... it means that they prefer their multi platform games on the platform the looks best... and gives them mouse/keyboard and mods

1. There is no such thing as a "console exclusive". What you have is an Xbox360 exclusive, a PS3 exclusive, a wii exclusive, an iphone exclusive, or a PC exclusive.

When I said "console exclusive titles", it meant console specific franchisees that are not available on the PC.

Which is a silly arbitrary split. PS3 exclusive and xbox360 exclusive and wii exclusive are 3 completely different beasts. Same with PC exclusive. You argument is "PCs miss out on all those awesome exclusives for PS3, xbox360, and wii" and then list the top of the top of such games... but what if we turned the argument?
"The PS3 sucks because it misses out on awesome PXW exclusives!" (where PXW is a catch all for PC, xbox, and wii exclusives).
You are pitting one platform vs 3 platforms and saying "AHA! The single platform has less exclusives then 3 other platforms combined"

There are plenty of those and some of them are excellent games. Sure as hell better than a mindless hallway shooter like Doom 3 or Quake 4 with clay looking enemies and 0 storyline to speak of.

Both Quake 4 and Doom 3 were released both on the PC and the Xbox... argument fail, try again. I agree that they are crappy games though... but they are NOT the games that define PC gaming... they are multi platform games...
The biggest definers of PC Gamers by volume would be casual and MMOs both of which I LOATHE personally... But there are types that are eclipsed by MMO and casual and yet still have massive multimillion dollar markets.

Yes, but the best PC exclusives nowadays? Maybe 2-3 a year that are AAA titles, none of which are the best platformers, 3d adventure/hack and slash games, racing or fighting games. So if you don't care for those genres, sure, PC-only gaming is sufficient. If your favourite games are MMOs, FPS and strategy, then PC rules. No doubt.

The issue is, the PC would be superior for every single one of these games...

I own this http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Xbox...0120132&sr=8-4

I have plugged a PC into a 150 inch projector with wireless keyboard, mouse, and awesome surround system. (HD movies on that were EPIC! One time the neighbors called the cops on us for the movie being too loud... the cops spent all their time being impressed by the setup and didn't even give us a warning)... its a shame I moved.

I have enjoy the 10$ less per game with mods on that setup. With a choice between mouse/keyboard and controller based on my whimsy that day.

The consoles of today are crippled PCs, both in hardware and software. They charge extra for the same games. they are DRMed up the wazoo yet have massive piracy. They have online updates which result in the same "released broken, fixed never" type of gaming PC used to suffer exclusively. And they don't offer a unique experience, only limitations.

Now, I will admit that the average person does not know how to make a proper HTPC, and can't afford to pay someone to do it for them... so a console is a relatively cheap alternative that is "good enough" for them. But the PC is certain CAPABLE of doing everything a console does, better.

BTW, if someone came up with a modern console that FORBIDS online updates to games I will buy it in a heartbeat... as that will FORCE companies to perform QA and games will be released completed. But the Era where consoles had that advantage ended with the PS2

 

[RussianSensation]

"I actually do... online. It is true that split screen gaming is VERY rare on the PC though. Although I have played many hotseat TBS games over the years"

That's why I care about single-player PC games and multi-player games on a console. To me multiplayer gaming is a social experience. That's why I have 0 interest in BF3 multiplayer online.

See to me playing a game of football the week before the superbowl or soccer when the world cup is on with my friends over beers is very enjoyable. I could care less if the game is running at 2560x1600 with 16xAA. But eh, it's good that not everyone likes the same things

I really enjoy our forum and will continue to support PC gaming and PC hardware .

 

[Rifter]

it's pretty insane what PC gamers spend just on video cards. a video card can cost the same or more than an entire PS3/360.

You are high right? Because last time i checked a $120 GTX 460/ATI 6850 will absoluty CRUSH any console graphics out there at higher resolutions at less than half the price of a console.

 

[taltamir]

That's why I care about single-player PC games and multi-player games on a console. To me multiplayer gaming is a social experience. That's why I have 0 interest in BF3 multiplayer online.

Yes, you found ONE situation where consoles hold the advantage... And what about all your other false claims?

Besides it's not a TECHNICAL advantage but a case where nobody in the PC gaming industry CARES enough to bother implementing such a feature... since PC gamers either do lan party or internet.

And speaking of... I actually just had a brainfart when I conceded the point as I managed to completely forget lan parties (despite having them!)

I have done lan parties. 24 inch monitor per person is better than 4 way split screen 6 feet away. You see practically nothing... not to mention how hard it is not to look at someone else's screen

And it is impossible to have more then 4 players at the same time... I remember plenty of times we would have to take turns on a console gaming party... While with PCs we all brought our own to the party and arranged folding tables and palyed all at once.

 

[ed29a]

Good games, but if someone doesn't like RTS or turn-based strategy games? Oh wait......that can't be the case for millions of console gamers can it? I own a PC and I have no interest to play WOW, ever. I have no interest in paying $15 / month x 12 months x 6 years ($1080) for any game. Or it can't be the case that I can play all those on my PC with a $150 graphics card and play everything else the PC doesn't have on a console? I suddenly have to be a PC only gamer because otherwise I am a console 'noob'? I didn't know to be a serious gamer you had to own the only manly platform - the PC.

Get off your high horse.

Notice on my reply to OP troll the letter 'I' preceding firing up some game. This letter 'I', indicates first person, me. As in: for me, for myself, my opinion, console gaming doesn't do it for me/myself/I. Nowhere in my post did I generalize about PC gamers = 'leet' and console gamers = 'noob'. I just pointed out to OP troll that the PC platform has quite a good selection of exclusive games that 'I', me, myself like a lot and can't play it on consoles. No need to put words in my mouth.

Understand? Need me to explain 'I' more in detail? Or want me to draw a picture?

 

[monkeh624]

 

[happy medium]

Dice stated that BF3 is the same quality on the x box 360 as a PC on low settings.
Next generation consoles will easily have the graphic quality of a gtx580 with BF3 @ 1080p ,ultra quality.

Remember consoles are optimized gaming machines,dedicated to do one thing, play games. No driver problems, no compatibility problems, just game.
A console with a 2900xt type gpu and a tri core cpu does a really good job even today and its 6 years old.

Is a PC superior? Yes. Will the next generation consoles be "good enough"?
I would say yes. There is no reason why the next generation consoles won't have games @ 1080p with AA/AF @ 60 fps. Just add a 3tb drive, mouse and keyboard and a way to use the web and its all good.

 

[taltamir]

Remember consoles are optimized gaming machines,dedicated to do one thing, play games.

Do you not remember the quotes where the PS3 and xbox 360 were referred to as media centers?

Not only that, their newest spiel is:

We've adopted a slightly different approach now, and are evolving the PS3 into a platform for web services
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/214634/sony-ceo-talks-ps3s-evolution/

No driver problems

Ever heard of mandatory system software updates?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_system_software

no compatibility problems

what? Consoles have horribad compatibility.
Sure, its difficult to get win 95 and 98 games to run on windows 7. But try running a PS1 game on the PS3? You cannot. A PS2 game? Those have much more compatibility issues compared to running a winXP game on win7.

On win7 you can natively run anything made for winXP and up. Have trouble with Win95-Me games. Use DOSbox to run ancient DOS games. Use emulators to run every older console perfectly.
PS3 has limited PS2 compatibility... and that's it. xbox has no backwards compatibility.

just game.

Except, with web updates most games are released broken, require a massive patch on day one, require a forced install to play...

That is assuming the forced update doesn't brick your PS3 or your xbox doesn't get the RROD.

A console with a 2900xt type gpu and a tri core cpu does a really good job even today and its 6 years old.

No it doesn't. It does a good ENOUGH job, there is a difference. Graphics are still incredibly dated looking.

 

[Red Storm]

It all depends on what games you like to play, that is basically what it boils down to.

I could care less about the God of War, Call of Duty refreshes and their many clones. I play on the PC because the vast majority of games I like to play (Starcraft 2, Oblivion-soon-to-be-Skyrim, Team Fortress 2, Battlefield 3, etc.) are hands down better on PC. There's no if, ands, or buts about it.

 

[cmdrdredd]

PS3 has limited PS2 compatibility... and that's it. xbox has no backwards compatibility.

backward compatibility for the PS3 with PS2 games is as follows on NTSC systems(some have hardware support some emulate via software):

20GB (4 USB slots, fat, no longer in production) - YES
60GB (4 USB slots, fat, no longer in production) - YES
80GB with 4 USB slots (fat, no longer in production, bundled with MGS4 or Motor Storm) - YES
40GB (2 USB slots, fat, no longer in production) - NO
80GB with 2 USB slots (fat, no longer in production) - NO
160GB (2 USB slots, fat, no longer in production) - NO
120GB/slim (2 USB slots) - NO
250GB/slim (2 USB slots) - NO

Xbox 360 Backwards compatbility list (there are 400 xbox games that run on the Xbox 360 it's all software, no hardware)

http://xbox.about.com/od/xbox360faqs/a/360bclist.htm