Console gaming> PC?

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"][QUOTE="death919"]

Saying Elder Scrolls 4 is worse than 1, 2, and 3 is opinion not fact.

death919

I didn't say it was fact, I said that it's a fact that many people say it is worse.

Now go take a lesson on reading properly.

Of course I said that I found Call of Duty 4 to be inferior to the original, but that still isn't stating it as a fact anyway - because I typed I found.

I stated the inferiority of console-multiplat sequels to PC-exclusive originals in a manner that looked like I said it was a fact because, well, I haven't seen anyone give a proper argument as to how Bioshock is superior to System Shock 2 or how Oblivion is superior to Morrowind, .etc.

Quote: "I should know, I've played Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and I can say that the original Call of Duty is still superior." I don't see the word "I found" in there at all.

Argument for why Elder Scrolls 4 is better than Elder Scrolls 3:
Elder Scrolls 4 average review score (according to gamerankings): 92.921
Elder Scrolls 3 average review score (according to gamerankings): 88.885

So not sure where you're getting that ES4 is generally considered worse than ES3.

Bioshock vs System Shock 2:
Bioshock: 95.076%
System Shock 2: 92.026%

What exactly are you basing your so-called "fact" that most people consider a) ES3 > ES4, and b) SS2 > Bioshock?

Okay you win on the "I found" part. Honestly, I shouldn't type like this (text towers, I make mistakes in memory when trying to refer back) but w/e. But I still consider Call of Duty 1 worse than Call of Duty 4, and I won't bother using another person's opinion (reviewers) to replace my own. But I concede defeat.

I didn't say that most people consider those sequels inferior, I said "many". And I'm not referring to reviewers. More like... uhh.... fans. Of those games. At least on these forums, I've seen plenty of people who said that Bioshock is worse than System Shock 2. Hell, Oblivion isn't only stated as being worse than previous ES games (by these same fans) it's also stated by RPG fans to be a poor RPG.

Oh and I apologize for acting in a childish manner. You may not guess it at all, but I'm 14. Generally, I try not to annoy forum posters with immature behaviour, but at this age I find it helpful to my real-life attitude to put in the effort into typing properly and using proper posting techniques. So forgive me if I came off as a bit rude.

I read his post. His argument was that the PC has a few better games this gen according to critic reviews. But honestly I'm wondering which games these are because personally I think the games exclusives released for PC over the last few years have been dry compared to consoles.ShimmerMan

And your argument is that the console has a few better games this gen according to your opinion?

Yeah, what I used for my argument isn't perfect (as reviewers ARE human) but it beats your argument into the dirt.

Graphics. PC multi- plats look better. yes if you have a $3000 system.ShimmerMan

Pathetic, pathetic attempt.

My PC which I spent about $1000 Australian dollars upgrading mid 2006 runs all those multiplats better than the 360.

Does COD4 look better on a mid range system than on a XBOX360? IMO noShimmerMan

It absolutely does.

As for exclusives... Most games ported to PC from console I wouldn't even install if someone gave them to me for free.ShimmerMan

So once again, your admitting I'm right, but that you don't count them because you've decided their not worthy?

AC/DMC4/GH... they're not PC games in the same way strategy is not a console game. the games that the PC has lost have been serios titles... Not crap like DMC4. Wer'e talking Call of duty series. Oblivion. Fallout3. Bioshock.. the best games of this generation.

ShimmerMan

Wrong, wrong, wrong. So many inaccuracies here.

Firstly, Fallout 3, COD 4 and Oblivion were not/aren't going to be the best games of this generation. Not in sales, not in critical acclaim, not in popularity, NOT EVEN IN THEIR RESPECTIVE FRANCHISES.

Secondly, Elder Scrolls and Fallout games have been on consoles before this generation. So much for this generation signalling the 'end' of impressive PC gaming.

Thirdly, Bioshock and Fallout were dead franchises before this generation (and Bioshock wasn't even a franchise before that).

Geez, your whole post is just you slapping your poorly constructed opinion on us all. I don't mind when someone says they don't like something, and can be open about it, but when people like you try to pass of subjective opinion as objective fact, it's pathetic.

[QUOTE="ShimmerMan"]

Games look and play better on consoles this generation.

d4nny-

...

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"][QUOTE="death919"]

Saying Elder Scrolls 4 is worse than 1, 2, and 3 is opinion not fact.

death919

I didn't say it was fact, I said that it's a fact that many people say it is worse.

Now go take a lesson on reading properly.

Of course I said that I found Call of Duty 4 to be inferior to the original, but that still isn't stating it as a fact anyway - because I typed I found.

I stated the inferiority of console-multiplat sequels to PC-exclusive originals in a manner that looked like I said it was a fact because, well, I haven't seen anyone give a proper argument as to how Bioshock is superior to System Shock 2 or how Oblivion is superior to Morrowind, .etc.

Quote: "I should know, I've played Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and I can say that the original Call of Duty is still superior." I don't see the word "I found" in there at all.

Argument for why Elder Scrolls 4 is better than Elder Scrolls 3:
Elder Scrolls 4 average review score (according to gamerankings): 92.921
Elder Scrolls 3 average review score (according to gamerankings): 88.885

So not sure where you're getting that ES4 is generally considered worse than ES3.

Bioshock vs System Shock 2:
Bioshock: 95.076%
System Shock 2: 92.026%

What exactly are you basing your so-called "fact" that most people consider a) ES3 > ES4, and b) SS2 > Bioshock?

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/bioshock/index.html?tag=result;title;0

user score: 8.8

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/systemshock2/index.html?tag=result;title;4

User score: 9.2

Most people who have played and enjoyed System Shock 2 when it came out will agree it's better. I wouldn't say Call Of Duty 4 is inferior like the other fellow, I'd argue it's the exact same game with skins. Bioshock is also very much the same as System Shock 2, the difference being it's watered down, Call Of Duty was pretty straight forward to begin with. Alot of people like Oblivion, including pc people, the user reviews are more favourable for oblivion for the pc version, there are people who didn't however, including myself who despise it.

[QUOTE="BladesOfAthena"]You haven't seen the GTX 280 then. Cuz that baby smokes the crap out of the X360's and PS3's video cards.ShimmerMan

And what exactly are you going to use that hardware for. I can only think of two games that need it, and those are Crysis and AOC. Any other decent game that has come out on the PC is on the console. And the consoles can run games at 19x12 resolutions without losing even 1 framerate. Where as to do the same thing on the PC you would need to spend 2k worth of dollars.

Anyway point being, PC game catalogue has dried up. yes the hardware is there but where are the PC exclusives that actually take use of the hardware?If they made Crysis for the consoles (which I believe is posssible) you would be able to run Crysis at 1080p with no dip in framerate.

Your comment about Crysis being done at 1080p with no framerate dip is laughable. If high end PC hardware that is 2-3 times more powerful then console hardware struggles with that game, what makes you think consoles could run that game? Maybe if you have low expectations and don't mind a massive reduction in texture quality as well as special effects and resolution then to each their own.

Bioware who created some of the best PC RPGs appear to concentrate more on consoles now days.ShimmerMan

Really? Bioware? Really?

Bioware who has never made a game that didn't go to PC (besides Dark Alliance lol)?

Bioware who has Dragon Age, a PC exclusive, planned and recently ported a superior version of Mass Effect to the PC?

Really?

Bethesda have gone multi-platform.ShimmerMan

And their superior versions are on PC.

Almost all of the good FPS are now on the consoles.ShimmerMan

And their superior versions are on PC.

Even HL2 and TF2.ShimmerMan

Gosh, I know. It's not like Half Life was on the PS2. Totally a new phenomenom.

Consoles are now outputting high resolutions which use to be one of the major perks of playing PC games. ShimmerMan

Firstly, the Wii is not.

Secondly, a surprisingly large amount of games on the 360 and PS3 are not even 720p. Most PC games don't even have that as a minimum anymore.

Where once there was a sea between console and PC now there is nothing but a pond. And yet the cost difference still remains.ShimmerMan

Except the vastly superior visuals. And the genres you can't find on consoles. Oh and the most accomplished and decentralized online gaming. And user created content (I guess UT3 on PS3 isn't cutting it).

But hey, you were right about some sort of convergence between PCs and consoles. This generation we've had (besides the 3D0) the two most expensive consoles ever!

The PC still has its benefits. It has those games which are perhaps not as high budget as the top titles but are still very good. For example The Witcher, Stalker and others. But even those games are rumored to be going to the consoles. And the PC has MMORPG if your into that kind of stuff. But still I think consoles are winning this generation war.

ShimmerMan

Sig me on this if you like.

Grand Theft Auto 4, Fable 2 and Halo 3 have much, much more chance than going to the PC than the Witcher and STALKER do goign to consoles.

I read his post. His argument was that the PC has a few better games this gen according to critic reviews. But honestly I'm wondering which games these are because personally I think the games exclusives released for PC over the last few years have been dry compared to consoles.

Graphics. PC multi- plats look better. yes if you have a $3000 system. Does COD4 look better on a mid range system than on a XBOX360? IMO no

As for exclusives... Most games ported to PC from console I wouldn't even install if someone gave them to me for free. AC/DMC4/GH... they're not PC games in the same way strategy is not a console game. the games that the PC has lost have been serios titles... Not crap like DMC4. Wer'e talking Call of duty series. Oblivion. Fallout3. Bioshock.. the best games of this generation.

ShimmerMan

I play multiplats at a higher res [well slightly 1280x1024 vs 1280x720 or lower] than the consoles with AA on what would be considered a low end PC in the current market, a 256mb 7950gt, athlon 3800+ [both with a little OCing] and 2gb 400mhz DDR.

So you wouldn't install AC [which I have on my pc and quite enjoyed], DMC4 or GH which means you dont seem to like action and party games probably one of the consoles strongest areas compared to the PC library.

What about Gears of War, Mass Effect, Street Fighter 4?

Quite frankly this is one of the worst times to be having a PC vs console debates imo as PC's are more affordable than in the past, consoles are more expensive, the majority of the big games are on both systems and the PC's list of exclusives is higher than all 3 consoles combined.

I wouldn't say Call Of Duty 4 is inferior like the other fellow, I'd argue it's the exact same game with skins. Call Of Duty was pretty straight forward to begin with.

Kez1984

Call of Duty was done better. Much better.

Even if the gameplay mechanics are similar, Call of Duty 4 still did it much worse, especially with the gunplay and respawning enemies part.

I read his post. His argument was that the PC has a few better games this gen according to critic reviews. But honestly I'm wondering which games these are because personally I think the games exclusives released for PC over the last few years have been dry compared to consoles.

Graphics. PC multi- plats look better. yes if you have a $3000 system. Does COD4 look better on a mid range system than on a XBOX360? IMO no

As for exclusives... Most games ported to PC from console I wouldn't even install if someone gave them to me for free. AC/DMC4/GH... they're not PC games in the same way strategy is not a console game. the games that the PC has lost have been serios titles... Not crap like DMC4. Wer'e talking Call of duty series. Oblivion. Fallout3. Bioshock.. the best games of this generation.

ShimmerMan

You really must not be educated in PC gaming because you made a very ignorant comment back there. Only console fanboys resort to saying crap like that. Almost no hermit or PC gamer spends even half that for a high end computer.

[QUOTE="Kez1984"]

I wouldn't say Call Of Duty 4 is inferior like the other fellow, I'd argue it's the exact same game with skins. Call Of Duty was pretty straight forward to begin with.

aliblabla2007

Call of Duty was done better. Much better.

Even if the gameplay mechanics are similar, Call of Duty 4 still did it much worse, especially with the gunplay and respawning enemies part.

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"][QUOTE="Kez1984"]

I wouldn't say Call Of Duty 4 is inferior like the other fellow, I'd argue it's the exact same game with skins. Call Of Duty was pretty straight forward to begin with.

Kez1984

Call of Duty was done better. Much better.

Even if the gameplay mechanics are similar, Call of Duty 4 still did it much worse, especially with the gunplay and respawning enemies part.

I feel different. When I played CoD4, I felt like I was playing a slower, tamer game than the original. Lowered recoil, weaker sounds, slowed pace, recharging health and more faceless enemies mainly changed the game for the worse, to me.

Games look and play better on consoles this generation.
ShimmerMan

[QUOTE="ShimmerMan"]Games look and play better on consoles this generation.
lowe0

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="ShimmerMan"]Games look and play better on consoles this generation.
anshul89

PC FOREVAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!! w00t PC.

You haven't seen the GTX 280 then. Cuz that baby smokes the crap out of the X360's and PS3's video cards.BladesOfAthena

Even an 8800 would be better.

[QUOTE="ShimmerMan"]Games look and play better on consoles this generation.Velocitas8

You must be posting from an alternate universe.

Crysis looks better big whup you wanna fight about it?

Anywho My 400$ 32" HD TV (1080i) runs mass effect, COD 4. The same as a pc, sure its cause their multi-plat but what good exclusive pc games are there? Besides blizzard. (ps stalker clear sky on 360 I hears :P)

PCs are still way more technically advanced than consoles, but yeah, developers are switching to the consoles more than PCs now. AIH_PSP

PC Still has the most exclusives, multiplats are coming over from both sides.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

What makes Crysis more deep and interesting than GTA IV?

anshul89

Nah, couldn't be. :roll:

[QUOTE="mismajor99"]

CoH 2 early next year

aliblabla2007

Company of Heroes 2 has been announced? And for 2009?

As far as I know, Relic has never released 2 full-blown games in one year. The most I've seen is an expansion pack and a full game in one year, and that's only one occasion so far.

Besides, it's not a good idea for a game company to release two products in direct competition.

Yeah, GFW was working on their cover story for CoH2, but the magazine was cancelled. They talked about it several times on the podcast they have. I think it's safe to assume DoW2 is released Jan/Feb 2009 and CoH2 would probably follow in Fall 09, even though there's seperate teams working on them, it would probably make more sense to gap their releases. Either way, Relic is just amazing

[QUOTE="anshul89"][QUOTE="lowe0"]

What makes Crysis more deep and interesting than GTA IV?

lowe0

Nah, couldn't be. :roll:

[QUOTE="ShimmerMan"]Games look and play better on consoles this generation.Velocitas8

You must be posting from an alternate universe.

Yeah, this kid needs his eyes checked. Pc games are always going to look better.Whether or not you like pad or k&m is personal preference. But honestly, why not play on pc. If you prefer gamepad just use that instead of the k&m.

they don't look better.

however, every other aspect...the console version beats.

they don't look better.

however, every other aspect...the console version beats.

r_gam3

Pc has a ton of mods, as you said better graphics, most of the time has a more mature community(not including WoW), FPS gameplay is much more precise,etc.

So how do consoles reign supreme over pc?.....they don't, but it's your opinion and thats cool.

So can i say things like PC gaming >>> Console gaming because the best console game of 2007 is far superior on pc ?anshul89

And as for GTA IV not winning any awards: we'll see in six months. It's a two-horse race at the moment, and I don't see anything for the rest of the year on ANY platform that could top GTA IV or MGS 4 (and this is coming from someone who hated MGS 3).

ShimmerMan

Read Damn_999's post and try to counter everything that he said.

I read his post. His argument was that the PC has a few better games this gen according to critic reviews. But honestly I'm wondering which games these are because personally I think the games exclusives released for PC over the last few years have been dry compared to consoles.

Graphics. PC multi- plats look better. yes if you have a $3000 system. Does COD4 look better on a mid range system than on a XBOX360? IMO no

As for exclusives... Most games ported to PC from console I wouldn't even install if someone gave them to me for free. AC/DMC4/GH... they're not PC games in the same way strategy is not a console game. the games that the PC has lost have been serios titles... Not crap like DMC4. Wer'e talking Call of duty series. Oblivion. Fallout3. Bioshock.. the best games of this generation.

A $150 8800gt which is at least twice as powerfull as the 7800gtx(ps3 gpu) or the ati x1900xt(360 gpu) can ru cod 4 at 1920x1024

with an average fps over 40fps with 4AA and 16Af while consoles run it at 720p with no AA or AF. Oh plus in consoles due to hardware limitations the game supports only 18 players online while the Pc support 32. And you dont need a $3000 Pc. A $700-800 pc can play all modern pc games and be future proof (i'm not asying a $400 pc since although it can play all todays games still it needs to be overclock and i dont think many people bother to do that plus is not future proof)

As for exclusives and lack of games for Pc go to pc games forum or visit this Pc games

[QUOTE="anshul89"]
So can i say things like PC gaming >>> Console gaming because the best console game of 2007 is far superior on pc ?lowe0

And as for GTA IV not winning any awards: we'll see in six months. It's a two-horse race at the moment, and I don't see anything for the rest of the year on ANY platform that could top GTA IV or MGS 4 (and this is coming from someone who hated MGS 3).

You can hook your PC up to your TV and use a controller, superior version confirmed.

You can hook your PC up to your TV and use a controller, superior version confirmed.

pieatorium

[QUOTE="pieatorium"]

You can hook your PC up to your TV and use a controller, superior version confirmed.

lowe0

Now that's just changing the subject and nit picking for faults...

They said you can hook up your PC to a TV to play games, this is 100% correct. That it is difficult to do spreadsheets or whatever other work applications isn't relevant to being able to play games that way.

[QUOTE="pieatorium"]

You can hook your PC up to your TV and use a controller, superior version confirmed.

lowe0

Now that's just changing the subject and nit picking for faults...

They said you can hook up your PC to a TV to play games, this is 100% correct. That it is difficult to do spreadsheets or whatever other work applications isn't relevant to being able to play games that way.

AnnoyedDragon

Anyway, hooking a PC to a TV wasn't the subject in the first place, nor is it the only reason why I prefer consoles (though it is a big one). Using a mouse on a couch is a pain in the ass, the consoles' interfaces are a lot simpler than Windows' (which makes sense, because it's fixed-function and has to do a lot less), I prefer the style of games on consoles (no Rock Band == no sale), and lastly, consoles are where my friends game (and I really prefer to play with my friends; this isn't a big deal for everyone, but it's a deal-breaker for me).

"But those are all opinions!" Yep. And they're what makes console gaming superior FOR ME. Superior is an opinion, and PC gamers can't just claim their versions are superior out of hand, because not everyone values the same things they do.

PCs don't have some sort of undeniable advantage such that anyone who doesn't value it above all else is an idiot. It's just another platform.

I enjoy pc and console gaming equally.Ballroompirate

This. It depends on the game not the system.

If this guy isn't trolling then I have little hope for humanity.

360/PS3 games look garbage compared to consoles, "holy crap graphic king" on console games are just average compared to PC games, infact "holy crap graphics king" ie. Gears of War 2 will be running on a console on medium/low settings, compared to the quality and improve textures the PC version will have. The fact you even compare multiplats performance shows you are clueless, you do realise the 360 version of games are dumbed down versions of the PC version? so saying "it performs better on a 360 than on an average pc" isn't any where near a valid point, comparing MGS4 graphics to Crysis is also laughable.

And IF Crysis or a game of it's caliber came to consoles it would be dumbed down to hell, running on low settings in sub 720p and still a dipping frame rate.

Also alot of PC games also own a console, just from experience on these forums and people I know... it's not like everyone who plays PC games says "I don't own a 360, I never will and I'm never going to buy one" - a lot of PC gamers also get the console experience, they just have higher standards because they also play PC Games... so they don't troll forums saying PC games suck and have a gears of war icon with a gamerscore in the signature.

you do realise the 360 version of games are dumbed down versions of the PC version?

Brainkiller05

If this guy isn't trolling then I have little hope for humanity.

360/PS3 games look garbage compared to consoles, "holy crap graphic king" on console games are just average compared to PC games, infact "holy crap graphics king" ie. Gears of War 2 will be running on a console on medium/low settings, compared to the quality and improve textures the PC version will have. The fact you even compare multiplats performance shows you are clueless, you do realise the 360 version of games are dumbed down versions of the PC version? so saying "it performs better on a 360 than on an average pc" isn't any where near a valid point, comparing MGS4 graphics to Crysis is also laughable.

And IF Crysis or a game of it's caliber came to consoles it would be dumbed down to hell, running on low settings in sub 720p and still a dipping frame rate.

Brainkiller05

Kind of negates the whole "PCs can do more" advantage, though.

lowe0

Excuse me? Did you just honestly question the "PCs can do more" argument because you have difficulty writing code on a low precision screen sat on the other side of the room? Seriously?

Anyway, hooking a PC to a TV wasn't the subject in the first place, nor is it the only reason why I prefer consoles (though it is a big one). Using a mouse on a couch is a pain in the ass, the consoles' interfaces are a lot simpler than Windows' (which makes sense, because it's fixed-function and has to do a lot less), I prefer the style of games on consoles (no Rock Band == no sale), and lastly, consoles are where my friends game (and I really prefer to play with my friends; this isn't a big deal for everyone, but it's a deal-breaker for me).

"But those are all opinions!" Yep. And they're what makes console gaming superior FOR ME. Superior is an opinion, and PC gamers can't just claim their versions are superior out of hand, because not everyone values the same things they do.

PCs don't have some sort of undeniable advantage such that anyone who doesn't value it above all else is an idiot. It's just another platform.

lowe0

Generally when you take the exact same game that is on consoles and crank up the res/frame rate, that is the supperior version. You can even choose between mouse & keyboard or game pad depending on your preference.

How is that not the superior version? It has everything the console version has at a higher quality.

Hey if you prefer consoles that is your business, but you are criticising proven PC advantages.

Aside from RTS and free MMORPG's, PC Gaming is pretty well behind Console Gaming.SoaSE_General

Sigh....

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

Now that's just changing the subject and nit picking for faults...

They said you can hook up your PC to a TV to play games, this is 100% correct. That it is difficult to do spreadsheets or whatever other work applications isn't relevant to being able to play games that way.

lowe0

Anyway, hooking a PC to a TV wasn't the subject in the first place, nor is it the only reason why I prefer consoles (though it is a big one). Using a mouse on a couch is a pain in the ass, the consoles' interfaces are a lot simpler than Windows' (which makes sense, because it's fixed-function and has to do a lot less), I prefer the style of games on consoles (no Rock Band == no sale), and lastly, consoles are where my friends game (and I really prefer to play with my friends; this isn't a big deal for everyone, but it's a deal-breaker for me).

"But those are all opinions!" Yep. And they're what makes console gaming superior FOR ME. Superior is an opinion, and PC gamers can't just claim their versions are superior out of hand, because not everyone values the same things they do.

PCs don't have some sort of undeniable advantage such that anyone who doesn't value it above all else is an idiot. It's just another platform.

So instead of saying superior we should instead say superior visuals with often enhanced options and gameplay, but inferior if you happen to disregard these features, which are a clear and easy way to compare multiple versions of a game, for personal reasons.

[QUOTE="SoaSE_General"]Aside from RTS and free MMORPG's, PC Gaming is pretty well behind Console Gaming.aliblabla2007

Sigh....

this is annoying now.

ok no crysis, no stalker, no world of warcraft, no spore, no flight simulator x, no armed assualt, no company of heroes, no empire total war, how is PC gaming behind again.

seriously name a console fps thats better than crysis or stalker,

on the subject of connecting the pc to the TV, i got one pc connected up to the tv that plays my music and movies and some games, and upstairs i got another gaming pc with my steering wheel, joystick etc.

so for me PC gaming i get the best of both worlds, the "locked away gaming" and social gaming

[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"]

you do realise the 360 version of games are dumbed down versions of the PC version?

lowe0

Having fun with Civ Revolution?

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"]

you do realise the 360 version of games are dumbed down versions of the PC version?

ice144

Having fun with Civ Revolution?

[QUOTE="ice144"][QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"]

you do realise the 360 version of games are dumbed down versions of the PC version?

lowe0

Having fun with Civ Revolution?

Then why did Supreme Commander fail on consoles?

Also, Civilization is one of the best strategy series ever made, which is why I used it, doesnt matter if you're a fan or not, just stating an example that you asked for.

I love how people whine and use the 'dumbed down' excuse, it doesn't change the fact most multiplats this gen happened to be more enjoyable on a console, regardless of technicle aspect and how much money is spent on hardware.

However the only worthwhile RTS this gen (multiplat or not) is still SoaSE.