[Rant] It's no wonder why you folks are so fanatical about PCs 33 replies

Please wait...

masked_marsoe Advanced Member

Heaven's gonna burn your eyes

50 XP

15th April 2005

0 Uploads

8,063 Posts

0 Threads

#21 10 years ago
MrFancypants;5350265[COLOR=Black] The reason a PS2 game developed today works on a PS2 made in 2001 is that developers are limited by the hardware. A PC game developed with the standards of 2001 would obviously work just as well on old PCs. Many types of PC games are actually not very hardware-dependant (e.g. adventures and to some extent strategy games). You have to pay more for PC hardware but you also get more in return.[/COLOR]

Yes - though a single set of hardware allows software to optimise for that hardware, whereas for PCs, the hardware optimises for the software. It's just a fact of the evolution of both systems and the way they have branched away.

Also, consoles perform as social experiences, whereas PCs are individual experiences. Consoles are meant to be shared, four friends:four controllers.

PCs - even online gaming - is an individual, personal experience. Even if you're in an online game with dozens of players, you are still alone; One player:one controller.

That's not a negative thing - I, for one, enjoy both, but I don't like playing a console game alone, and I can't stand having someone watching over my shoulder when I'm on the PC.




MrFancypants Forum Administrator

The Bad

218,731 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

20,060 Posts

12 Threads

#22 10 years ago

Zamamee;5350269Unfortunately, this advantage seems to be diminishing. Traditionally for the past few years, console games have released at $59.99 and PC games (even PC versions of the same console games, like CoD4) released at $49.99. However, recently, new major PC releases (notably CoD:MW2, Assassin's Creed 2, Medal of Honor) have been $59.99 as well.[/QUOTE][COLOR=Black] That's the worst thing about consoles if you ask me - they are a trend setter for the PC market but most of the trends suck. One of those trends is the increase the price of the game while its value (complexity, duration of the game) is decreased.[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=masked_marsoe;5350310]Yes - though a single set of hardware allows software to optimise for that hardware, whereas for PCs, the hardware optimises for the software. It's just a fact of the evolution of both systems and the way they have branched away.

Also, consoles perform as social experiences, whereas PCs are individual experiences. Consoles are meant to be shared, four friends:four controllers.

PCs - even online gaming - is an individual, personal experience. Even if you're in an online game with dozens of players, you are still alone; One player:one controller.

That's not a negative thing - I, for one, enjoy both, but I don't like playing a console game alone, and I can't stand having someone watching over my shoulder when I'm on the PC.

[COLOR=Black]True, consoles are indeed much better when you have friends over or for casual gaming.

As for the optimization - it is good for developers to have to think only about two or three sets of hardware, but there isn't much of an advantage in this for the customer. Consoles games are still more expensive even though development costs are lower. And if you look at customers across platforms a console-game ported to PC is usually performs worse than a PC-game ported to consoles. [/COLOR]




Von II

aka noobst3R

50 XP

16th June 2008

0 Uploads

4,339 Posts

0 Threads

#23 10 years ago
Zamamee;5349575Any illusion of skill created by the "even ground" of console play is completely removed since they have auto-aim.

This. I pwned my hardcore MW2 friend at his home on the PS3, and i actually only play Skate once in a while on my 360. Just walking around and all i get are headshots and stuff. But on the other hand, it's just so frustrating when you die because the tiny stick didn't allow a clean shot.

Long live PC gaming and my Razer mouse!




darkclone

116,900 XP

10th April 2006

0 Uploads

11,075 Posts

0 Threads

#24 10 years ago

Being an avid PS3 gamer, you'd expect me to say consoles are better. But at the moment, that's only because I run a Mac, which can barely run single player games at decent speeds, let alone multiplayer.

I can remember back when I played the original COD, SW: Battlefront and Jedi Outcast/Academy online, and how much I sucked. But, at least I sucked because I was 13, and not because the stick is set too senstive, or nowhere near sensitive enough. I played Bad Company 2 on my mates PC the other day, and whilst the graphics were on level pegging, I played so much better than I have ever done on PS3 (even with his keyboard layout, who the fuck uses ESDF?).

Hopefully I'll get a new computer soon (been a Mac four years next month), sell off some PS3 games (maybe even the PS3) and get some games on PC.




Ensign Riles Advanced Member

No! I'm Spamacus!

426,537 XP

17th June 2003

0 Uploads

39,480 Posts

1 Threads

#25 10 years ago

I haven't used a console before, and I have no desire to do so either. My main reasons:

1. My computer is much more portable. 2. A lot more replay value with modifications. 3. Much better control with mouse and keyboard.




Junk angel

Huh, sound?

166,880 XP

28th January 2007

0 Uploads

15,678 Posts

0 Threads

#26 10 years ago
Yes - though a single set of hardware allows software to optimise for that hardware, whereas for PCs, the hardware optimises for the software. It's just a fact of the evolution of both systems and the way they have branched away.

To be honest it's not as much working to one single hardware set (albeit extremely important) it's more due to a deeper pick into the system that a console developer has. When making a game for a console, the access you get to the rendering pipeline is leap and bounds elsewhere than what you get on the PC. And that's due to what the device is designed to do.

Still, at the same time, PC hardware tends to extremely quickly outpace console hardware. Usually both are more or less equal only during the release of a new console generation. Then for something like 6 to 12 months the console is the better investment for price. After that mark, you can usually build a computer that outperforms the console for less. That's why you have a lot of consoles pretty brutally slashing the price then. Plus a lot of people actually assume that the rising hardware necessity of PC version of console games (on the same generation) might have less to do with actually more features and instead might have something to do with the pushings of console publishers.




Schofield Advanced Member

om :A

319,619 XP

23rd October 2007

1 Uploads

30,542 Posts

1 Threads

#27 10 years ago

I honestly don't care if I have to use a controller or mouse (except the horrid 360 controller, it's D-pad is in a horrible place). My PC is pretty up to date with the i7 and what not, but I still prefer consoles over it because they offer more in my opinion. I actually own 2 versions of GTA IV and Fallout 3, both for PS3 and PC, the PC ones are full of glitches and errors that you would never find on a console, my console has yet to fail me in any bad way whereas any PC I use has several errors. A few years ago my PC wouldn't let me play any games using Source engine, I had to completely wipe out my hard drive to fix it, and it still didn't work, so I had to buy a new hard drive and they did work. I would be truly amazed if this happened on a console (I've yet to hear of it). PC's can be amazing when they don't whine and bitch about framerate problems though.




BlitZ, The 57th

Fack, Fack you, Fack that

50 XP

20th April 2007

0 Uploads

3,236 Posts

0 Threads

#28 10 years ago

At least you can keep patching on the PC if there are any problems.... Plus mods, how many times has a console gamer complained about not being able to use this great mod or that awesome mod.

I initially thought bad company was pretty darn good and all. But after trying out Bad Company 2, it was really not as great as most people say it out to be. Got pretty tired of multiplayer easily more so that Battlefield 2142 and Battlefield 2. I would have gotten a game with mods rather than games that used to be console exclusive.

Although 1 of the flaws of the PC would be, biased game makers. Like fracken Square Enix. You'd find games like Final Fantasy 13 to be exclusive to consoles or Halo (even the strategy game itself). Sometimes I find it a bit frustrating why they use PC tools to make console games but not make it PC compatible too. Yes, I know the reasons why, but it feels a bit like "they are ungrateful" for using PC tools to make console games but not make them PC compatible... Plus I don't hear much people talking about Halo Wars, so HAH, in your face game creators. Making a strategy game console exclusive, worst. Idea. Ever.




darkclone

116,900 XP

10th April 2006

0 Uploads

11,075 Posts

0 Threads

#29 10 years ago
BlitZ, The 57th;5350762Plus I don't hear much people talking about Halo Wars, so HAH, in your face game creators. Making a strategy game console exclusive, worst. Idea. Ever.

Same shit happened with Alien Versus Predator Extinction. Console only RTS's just fail. A shame since it had such potential.




Makrin

Dude, fireflies!

50 XP

25th March 2008

0 Uploads

1,257 Posts

0 Threads

#30 10 years ago

I find PC controls to be easier simply because there's so much more to work with. As for the communities, well...I can't really say anything about them. Sure, consoles are full of little kids, but so are PCs. The best bet for avoiding them is to find a decent group of gamers and stick with them.