Console vs PC

[maxqubit 1]

Wow console fans praising their mantras...  

You didnt say yet: "We're all lazy guys and want simple push-teh-button game."

There is nobody forcing people to buy a customizable PC or simple console. Its still their own decission.  

Lol, nope the pc guys are the 'simple' ones.

Well we have a 101 keys keyboard so any decent game should USE THEM ALL ... because 'that is better' ... suppose somebody thinks of a 501 keys keyboard, i'm sure some dev will make a game using ALL those key, and pc guys will praise that game as 'even better then a 101 keys game'

Lol:P

[sparks50 0]

Who knows, the gaming industry could actually profit from the credit crunch, with people loosing their job thus getting more time on their hands.

[Blackbird1967 10]

opflashpoint on XB 1 runs just fine...

it all comes down to personal preference so you will hear alot in favor of th pc version - however on consoles it it still (the same) very good!

[Matt International 10]

If I might add my 2 pennies to this discussion...and it might well have been said already.

My computer history runs much like this...

ZX81

Some Binatone plug into your tv thingy with a light gun and wheely paddles

Commodore 64

Atari ST

386 SX 25Mhz (with the first ever triple speed cdrom I might add)

SNES

Sega Saturn

486 DX 66Mhz

Playstation

PII 350 Mhz

Playstation 2

PIII 450 Mhz

Xbox

Athlon XP 1.25 Ghz

Xbox 360

P4 1.6 Ghz

P4HT 3Ghz

The order might be a bit out in places? And this probably shows my age somewhat.

Each PC saw a number of incarnations with various CD drives, RAM, and GPU's. Numurous Re builds.

I'm not for or against either format. But I am now pretty much a console gamer for the following reason.

Consoles have a life span of 5 plus years. During this time you get a standard of gaming that does not change for the worse. As programmers use them more, they get more out of them, so generally the games released toward the end of a console shelf life are superior.

With PC's as each wonderful new type of RAM, Graphics Card and so on are developed programmers try to take advantage of it. Which is fine, for those who have either just bought a PC to that standard or have £500 for the latest PCI Express X-fire graphics cards.

I'm all for technology moving forward. I just can't justify the expense of keeping my PC up to date for entertainment when I have bills to pay and work to find.

Console owners are not dumb. Granted, you might be forgiven for thinking that if you've ever played Cod or Halo online. I don't play these games for that reason, well, that and I actually think they are pretty dire. The likes of GRAW and Rainbow Six are different and generally have a more mature audience who are possibly in the same boat as me. They've got other more important things to be spending their time and money on.

Consoles are simple yes, but this is part of their beauty. I switch it on, I put in the disc, I play. No more tweaking settings to get a game playable and loosing all the wonderful effects you really wish you could see but you're computer can't handle.

I'm going on a bit but I hope people are getting the point. PC's are cool, but so are consoles!

The quality of each format depends on how much effort the developer puts into them.

Edited April 24, 2009 by Matt International

[POTS 0]

If I might add my 2 pennies to this discussion...and it might well have been said already.

My computer history runs much like this...

ZX81

Some Binatone plug into your tv thingy with a light gun and wheely paddles

Commodore 64

Atari ST

386 SX 25Mhz (with the first ever triple speed cdrom I might add)

SNES

Sega Saturn

486 DX 66Mhz

Playstation

PII 350 Mhz

Playstation 2

PIII 450 Mhz

Xbox

Athlon XP 1.25 Ghz

Xbox 360

P4 1.6 Ghz

P4HT 3Ghz

The order might be a bit out in places? And this probably shows my age somewhat.

Each PC saw a number of incarnations with various CD drives, RAM, and GPU's. Numurous Re builds.

I'm not for or against either format. But I am now pretty much a console gamer for the following reason.

Consoles have a life span of 5 plus years. During this time you get a standard of gaming that does not change for the worse. As programmers use them more, they get more out of them, so generally the games released toward the end of a console shelf life are superior.

With PC's as each wonderful new type of RAM, Graphics Card and so on are developed programmers try to take advantage of it. Which is fine, for those who have either just bought a PC to that standard or have £500 for the latest PCI Express X-fire graphics cards.

I'm all for technology moving forward. I just can't justify the expense of keeping my PC up to date for entertainment when I have bills to pay and work to find.

Console owners are not dumb. Granted, you might be forgiven for thinking that if you've ever played Cod or Halo online. I don't play these games for that reason, well, that and I actually think they are pretty dire. The likes of GRAW and Rainbow Six are different and generally have a more mature audience who are possibly in the same boat as me. They've got other more important things to be spending their time and money on.

Consoles are simple yes, but this is part of their beauty. I switch it on, I put in the disc, I play. No more tweaking settings to get a game playable and loosing all the wonderful effects you really wish you could see but you're computer can't handle.

I'm going on a bit but I hope people are getting the point. PC's are cool, but so are consoles!

The quality of each format depends on how much effort the developer puts into them.

5+ years because no new ones are ever out in that much time. LOL! :bounce3:

[Matt International 10]

5+ years because no new ones are ever out in that much time. LOL! :bounce3:

Heh, but the point for this is that a company spends a lot of money putting it's unit together and then sells it at an affordable price knowing they will need to sell XX Million units to recoup their R and D costs.

What I forgot to say also is that as the unit contains componants that aren't changed through it's life time "In theory" you should get a game that is free of bugs. I say "In theory", sadly even console games come with glitches due to companies rushing to get things released and not properly testing them. I suspect this is mostly publisher pressure than developer ignorance.

I've been meaning to add a sig to my profile that relates to this in some way....

"sales director:....After all, money makes the world go round.

sales assistant:..No it doesn't.....Gravity does."

I was the sales assistant. A week later they made me redundant. Well, I thought it was funny.

[POTS 0]

Heh, but the point for this is that a company spends a lot of money putting it's unit together and then sells it at an affordable price knowing they will need to sell XX Million units to recoup their R and D costs.

What I forgot to say also is that as the unit contains componants that aren't changed through it's life time "In theory" you should get a game that is free of bugs. I say "In theory", sadly even console games come with glitches due to companies rushing to get things released and not properly testing them. I suspect this is mostly publisher pressure than developer ignorance.

I've been meaning to add a sig to my profile that relates to this in some way....

"sales director:....After all, money makes the world go round.

sales assistant:..No it doesn't.....Gravity does."

I was the sales assistant. A week later they made me redundant. Well, I thought it was funny.

Affordable because they aren't very powerful. LOL! :bounce3:

[Matt International 10]

Affordable because they aren't very powerful. LOL! :bounce3:

Heh, I'm not gonna bite but kindly point out...

The xbox 360 is 3 1/2 years old. It's not going to be as powerful as the latest and greatest PC. However, the technology in it is quite comparable in performance with PC's of 3 1/2 years ago.

And when I quote 3 1/2 years, thats from commercial release. It was being developed long before this.

Besides, power is not the be all and end all. You can quote your clock speed and memory size. But if the individual componants don't like working with one another and your buss size isn't adequate, it's all for nothing. I know this has happened with some graphics cards, initially the stats look impressive with 1Gb Vram and silly clock speeds, but it's all for nothing if the buss can't take.

Consoles are sold as is. They are tested and built so the componants work together, efficiently. This is why Apple Macs are a more stable platform and are the computer of choice for serious professionals. You might be able to change your GPU, DVD drive and RAM, but the essentials, the motherboard, processor and perhaps more importantly the OS are all tested extensively to ensure they perform and are stable.

[Steakslim 1]

You do know PC's and MAC's are really no longer better or worse than one another these days, aside from different supported software and that MAC's are overpriced, beyond that it's really up to one's preference. That's really my only bias regarding them, and no I am not saying they are bad in any way, just shamelessly overpriced. Beyond that MAC's are excellent for the media field. From a previous thread that you posted in, I'm guessing you are refering to PC construction to support the hardware and software requirements for a DAW. If a person cannot research the parts to assemble a PC to where the components are compatible and are stable with one another in order to support this rather expensive hobby/profession, then this person shouldn't be attempting to build their own rig. They have VisionDAW or SonicaLabs that'll do that for them extremely well for the extra cost.

As for consoles, I don't feel that they're worth the money. To some people they are the cat's meow, and if they like it so be it, but I do not like missing out on things that come from mod communities, I don't like being stuck on aging technology, and I do not like being fucked in the ass with an unreliable machine all because of a warranty leaving me with a mini-pc with parts built by the lowest bidder. You cannot say a Xbox360 is a stable platform when they are notorious for bricking.

[amadieus 0]

my personal preference would be a console.

1.cheap

2.hanging in myn couch with a big tv

3.no installs

4. no errors

5. les bugged games

to bad i don't have mods :(

[JB Time 0]

As for consoles, I don't feel that they're worth the money. To some people they are the cat's meow, and if they like it so be it, but I do not like missing out on things that come from mod communities, I don't like being stuck on aging technology, and I do not like being fucked in the ass with an unreliable machine all because of a warranty leaving me with a mini-pc with parts built by the lowest bidder. You cannot say a Xbox360 is a stable platform when they are notorious for bricking.

Fair enough, that's your opinion.

I've still got my launch Xbox 360 and up to now I've had no issues........I hope I haven't just tempted fate :)

A friend of mine had issues with his so he sent it to MS for fixing (free of charge). Since getting it back it's been fine for him. Most people I know have had a good 360 experience but I'm sure there are some who have suffered from faulty machines. I bought a faulty Sony DVD player the other day, it happens sometimes with electronic equipment.

This whole debate is pretty pointless really, it's all just down to personal preference. I know a fair few PC gamers who have recently gone to consoles purely for an easier life. When you have a mortgage, family, social commitments etc, sometimes simplifying aspects of your life can be a benefit. Others people, like yourself, enjoy a more proactive approach to gaming.

Like I said, it's all down to personal preference.

[Placebo 28]

I'm struggling to see the relevance to anything ArmA2 related here, so I'll move it to OT, if it has legs it can stay.

[Yapab 10]

Been reading the forums and had to register to give my input on this console vs pc discussion!

I think we are all forgetting that with a console... we are getting less of the game quality (visually).

Basically worse graphics/physics and effects.

So if you are prepared to play a worse looking game then yes console is cheaper and trouble free.

My almost 3 year old system (Core2Duo @ 3.44ghz, 8800GTX, 4gb DDR800) can still today run most games maxed out with more than 4x AA (consoles have a max of 4x aa).

Now... if I wanted to, I could play any game on my 50" bravia in full hd on this PC with the level of detail that a console would give.

So for example, I could play Far Cry 2 on medium to low details (like console) at full HD 1920 x 1080 and it would run perfectly fine.

The PC has to be upgraded constantly because it PUSHES technology to its maximum and innovates games, unlike consoles.

As someone above said... when you buy a console, the level of performance in new games over the 5 years does not get lower... HOWEVER the level of graphics quality and sophistication does not get MUCH higher, if at all.

So if you want the best from your game, PC is the only medium for you... and yes you will have to Pay to Play :)

EDIT: forgot to mention that most games on console run in 720p, not full hd 1080p... most pc's less than 4 years old could run this resolution easily.

Yapa

[Rhodite 3]

POTS

Your contribution to this discussion has been minimal at best. Everyone here is making a good effort to discuss the topic in hand while you see fit to post 2 very glib and frankly pointless posts with no content.

Persist and you will be PR'd on the basis that your posts have no value other than spam.

[POTS 0]

POTS

Your contribution to this discussion has been minimal at best. Everyone here is making a good effort to discuss the topic in hand while you see fit to post 2 very glib and frankly pointless posts with no content.

Persist and you will be PR'd on the basis that your posts have no value other than spam.

What are you talking about, they all pointed to perfectly reasonable reasons why consoles are cheap and sustain 5+ years. Just because it's not laid out into a long pointless paragraph doesn't mean it's spam. To me, a long pointless paragraph is more spam than anything else. If your going to harass me for no reason then I guess I can just leave this forum and become an example of a client abused by an admin.

[Daddl 10]

My almost 3 year old system (Core2Duo @ 3.44ghz, 8800GTX, 4gb DDR800) can still today run most games maxed out with more than 4x AA (consoles have a max of 4x aa).

And surly that is exactly the setup you bought 3 years ago, right? No upgrades, anything? How much money did you spend at the time, how much did you pour into your pc since then? A console costs 200-400 Euros. Once. No further upgrades needed until you switch to the next generation many years later. More money left to actually buying good games or to spend on a nice vaccacion and other Real Life stuff. That's the beauty of it.

I'be been playing since the early 80s - first on an Atari 800XL (1.77MHz - eat that you C64 suckers :D ), then on to my first pc (8MHz 8088, 2 full-sized 5.25 inch floppy drives, no hard disk, CGA graphics, Space Quest 1 :) ), and I went through all pc and MS-DOS/Windows generations since then - always upgrading, always getting a new gfx card, a new cpu/mobo or some more ram. I don't know how much money I poured into the hardware industry, but I know I could have spend much of it in better ways.

Nowadays I just buy a new notebook every few years, and that's it. And even tho the current one has a dual core cpu, 4GB ram and even a mediocre dx10 gfx card the only games installed are old classics like Baldurs's Gate or the old Fallout games: stuff that simply doesn't exist for the console and which I like to play when traveling. For all the fancy stuff (GTA4, Fallout3, MGS4, etc.) I definitely prefer the console because there the games just work without a hassle.

Sure, the graphics might be no equivalent to what the latest pc cards can offer, and memory is a joke compared to even a a below-average pc, but what do I care - the games are actually optimized for the console hardware: as it's identical for all customers the developers don't have to make amends for that wild hardware mix that's called a 'standard pc' but can go straight for the console's strenghts (like utilizing the full power of the 7-core PS3 cpu)! So even though the hardware might be 'inferior' the games run well and can be played exactly as intended by the developer. All the endless tweaking and looking for the right driver, all the time lost for nothing is a complete non-issue with consoles.

All that doesn't make consoles any 'better' (which is always a subjective thing to say), but they are definitely the more convenient gaming platform. And people who actually got a life prefer cheap and convenient things over expensive stuff that's also a hassle. :p

Edited April 25, 2009 by the-real-daddl
spelling

[Steakslim 1]

I think there's a common mistake that people who like to build pc's have no life. An interesting thing is once a pc is build, it can go on for a quite a long time with few upgrades only necessary to what the builder/owner wants, because only a few games come along per year that ever require someone who is big into gaming to need to upgrade to the current best, and now with the better support for SLI/Crossfire configurations, there are much easier and cheaper solutions. Most of my spending for the pc after it being built was to keep it cool due to lack of AC during the summer, and bad ram which moving from Crucial to Gskill brand solved quickly. Aside from the the rest of the upgrades are not game related, as if anyone who builds a pc for games strictly....might want to reconsider, as it can be a long and frustrating.

[POTS 0]

It's important to understand that a console is not as powerful as a pc. Thats why it's cheap. The xbox360 is simply easier to make games for and because of this results in highly efficient games that take advantage of all details in a console. But it's important to understand that a PC has far more potential then a console when it comes to hardware power.

[Placebo 28]

Not quite as cheap when factoring in how many $bn RROD cost them ;)

[echo1 0]

And people who actually got a life prefer cheap and convenient things over expensive stuff that's also a hassle. :p

Definitely. I'd much rather build a PC than buy overpriced console games and be forced to RMA some poorly designed console every few months.

[ricoadf 0]

Consoles are just PC's in a different case and can do anything a PC can, in the end its the software (game) that chooses if theres a difference.

Yes a PC can be updated, but they also have issues of hardware compatability etc etc, a console stays the same and so games have less bugs and far less crashes etc, in the end it comes down to if you wanna meddle around or just play the game.

[POTS 0]

Consoles are just PC's in a different case and can do anything a PC can, in the end its the software (game) that chooses if theres a difference.

Yes a PC can be updated, but they also have issues of hardware compatability etc etc, a console stays the same and so games have less bugs and far less crashes etc, in the end it comes down to if you wanna meddle around or just play the game.

What about xbox360 overheating? Or the ps2 disk read error hell? A lot of people were screwed over by this. And they could not just trade out bad or damaged components because you cant modify consoles.

[Placebo 28]

What about xbox360 overheating?

You pick up the phone, call MS, they send you a pre-postage paid wooden box, you box up your 360, call DHL, they collect your 360, then in bout 10-14 days on average your newly fixed 360 returns ;)

[POTS 0]

You pick up the phone, call MS, they send you a pre-postage paid wooden box, you box up your 360, call DHL, they collect your 360, then in bout 10-14 days on average your newly fixed 360 returns ;)

ok, so the next one won't overheat?

[Pyronick 21]

ok, so the next one won't overheat?

If it's a refurbish, it probably will in the same conditions.

But the latest generation Xbox360 and PS3 have gone through a die-shrink process to 65nm.

The Jasper revision of the Xbox360 has both 65nm CPU and GPU and every console after the CECHE** revision of the Playstation 3 also has 65nm CPU and GPUs.

The Playstation 3 will have a die-shrink to 45nm this year if all goes according to plan.

Die-shrinks usually solves cooling problems if the specifications are the same.