For those of you that don't play PC...

Because i just cant get use to playing games with a mouse and keyboard.Ive always played games with a controller and didnt get my first computer til around 2001.I bought my first home computer for buisness reasons and for what ever reason gaming and pc was always seperate for me.Im sure if i had to i could get use to playing with a mouse and keyboard but id rather use a controller until the day comes when i have to switch console for pc.

loudharley

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="AdmiralRJW"]

may I ask, what is it that keeps you from playing PC exactly?

mouthforbathory

Mobile HD gaming i.e. atleast 1280x720p on console ports. I also travel overseas and other locations, watch Adobe Flash animation, Video Skype, Digital camera/video's overflow storage, record conferences, MS-Excel/Word/Outlook,MS-Remote Desktop/VPN, Visual C++ programming, Unreal3 SDK, Virtualbox, Adobe Photoshop and 'etc'. About 52 watts power consumption during HD gaming i.e. lower than HD consoles.

I'm also in notebookreview.com. The ExpressCard-to-PCI-Express adapter (similar adapter as use in ViDock) is not entirely homebrew.

The adapter I use is PE4H-EC2C(comes with another ATX power switch PCB)

It's an ExpressCard-to-PCI-Express(16X physical slot) adapter. The cable is just mini-HDMI-to-mini-HDMI i.e. to transfer PCI signals. I recycled unused Antec 430 watt power supply.

To support "fat" GPUs like Radeon HD 3870 or Radeon HD 5770, I removed 2 Amp rated fuse by soldiering the two pads together. According to my communications with PCB vendor, the next PCB revision supports higher rated AMP fuse. I modified my PCB adapter sometime in March 2010. I haven't checked if PCB vendor revised the adapter.

Without using boot software workarounds, one of biggest issues withany ExpressCard GPU adapter is the broken ExpressCard resource allocation setups on some laptops. For example, from my experience my ASUS G1SN and ASUS N80VN laptops have broken ExpressCard resource allocation implementations. My Sony laptop doesn't need such workarounds. :)

Hopefully, somebody completes boot PCI resource allocation defragmenation.

[QUOTE="Sonicplys"]

I dont understand why either since the PC is basically a more superior gaming machine than the 360 and PS3.

theseekar

Because simply put

PS3 +360 have all the best PC games

PC has none of PS3+360 best games

It is all about the games, and PC is vastly inferior in that

I just want to game on my 46 inch HDTV while lounging on the couch with a controller in my hand. I also dont have the patience to build my own gaming rig. I like the simple things in life.:P Turn on the tv and console and just start playing.

coltsfan4ever

Because i just cant get use to playing games with a mouse and keyboard.Ive always played games with a controller and didnt get my first computer til around 2001.I bought my first home computer for buisness reasons and for what ever reason gaming and pc was always seperate for me.Im sure if i had to i could get use to playing with a mouse and keyboard but id rather use a controller until the day comes when i have to switch console for pc.

loudharley

You can always hook your PC to the TV and play using the 360 controller :)

Here's a big reason for me: I'm impatient. I don't like reading about some cool upcoming game and then having to wait and hope that it comes out on pc, only to have it delayed or poorly optimized. I want the game on day 1 and I want the version that they spent the most time on. I also play JRPGs so having a console in the living room is a requirement. I suppose I could keep a pc in the living room but there isn't much point when the best pc exclusives require a mouse and keyboard. And no I'm not going to keep a mouse and keyboard on the coffee table. That isn't couch gaming.

Another issue I have is with digital game prices on the pc. Steam is a great service but the digital version of a multiplat should not be $50 when there's no retail cut or used sales. But pc gamers at some point went along with it and now every new release is $50. Lame. I noticed Splinter Cell on Steam is $60 and requires a constant connection. It also came out a few weeks late. That pretty much sums up why pc gaming is no longer a hobby of mine.

The only big game I'll play on pc this year will be Diablo 3. I'll probably also play a few indy games from Steam but 90% of my gaming will be on the 360.

dc337

I guess if you can't wait and need it right away, then console is all for you.

But I have so many games and so little time, I just got myself the steam racing codemaster deal, for 17.99$ (includes dirt 1, dirt 2, grid and or racing games)... In a way, this is why I don't mind waiting.

[QUOTE="loudharley"]

Because i just cant get use to playing games with a mouse and keyboard.Ive always played games with a controller and didnt get my first computer til around 2001.I bought my first home computer for buisness reasons and for what ever reason gaming and pc was always seperate for me.Im sure if i had to i could get use to playing with a mouse and keyboard but id rather use a controller until the day comes when i have to switch console for pc.

fend_oblivion

You can always hook your PC to the TV and play using the 360 controller :)

A lot of people like to play their games consoles in communal rooms (where the biggest tv is often situated) but have their pc's in their bedrooms/ studys...moving my computer to a tv would involve dragging it to the other side of my house, and then when i next wanted to work on my pc, i'd need to drag it back to my room again, soooo much effort

not everyone is in this situation, but quite a few blatantly are...

[QUOTE="fend_oblivion"]

[QUOTE="loudharley"]

Because i just cant get use to playing games with a mouse and keyboard.Ive always played games with a controller and didnt get my first computer til around 2001.I bought my first home computer for buisness reasons and for what ever reason gaming and pc was always seperate for me.Im sure if i had to i could get use to playing with a mouse and keyboard but id rather use a controller until the day comes when i have to switch console for pc.

real_nimrod

You can always hook your PC to the TV and play using the 360 controller :)

A lot of people like to play their games consoles in communal rooms (where the biggest tv is often situated) but have their pc's in their bedrooms/ studys...moving my computer to a tv would involve dragging it to the other side of my house, and then when i next wanted to work on my pc, i'd need to drag it back to my room again, soooo much effort

not everyone is in this situation, but quite a few blatantly are...

Being close to a small screen gives the same feeling at being close to a big screen.

Heck I can get sucked into a game on my DS and lose concentration of everything else.

Buy a comfy chair and you will be set.

My computer chair is so comfy I could fall asleep in it.

I do play PC games, but I don't really maintain a gaming rig.

My PC: Quad-Core 6600, GeForce 8500 GT, 3 GB Ram, bought off the shelf in late 2007, I believe.

For all of the "cost is a myth" talk, it really isn't in one sense. Today you can make a gaming rig as powerful as the 360 or PS3 for sub $500, but I have had my consoles since launch. At launch you could not even come remotely close to building a rig that could run Oblivion as good as it looked on the 360 for the $400 it cost.

This is the first generation where that statement was still true a year in, the consoles didn't date anywhere near as fast as they have in the past. Even two years in, late 2007-early 2008, it still cost around $1000 to make a 360 equivalent machine, add another $200-$250 back then for a Blu-Ray drive to get that particular functionality of the PS3. Crysis was interesting in that it showed just how stalled everything is, here we are two and a half years since its release and the PC hasn't matched it since, and what's more very, Very few people could even afford to run the thing the way it was meant to be played when it came out. "Why do you have to play it on max, consoles can't?" You don't, but why own a more expensive PC if all it can do is break even on resolution.

At the same time, big name PC developers began shifting their focus on to the consoles. When John Carmack said that the 360 was the primary development environment for Id's next big title, something is very, Very wrong in PC land. There hasn't been a year with a big budget, highly hyped and marketed release schedule on the PC that has matched the consoles since 2004. No this is not me claiming PC is dying or anything of the sort, but you have to be blind to notice it has a way lower profile. The releases are just as numerous if not more so, there is a big central hub in steam (not sure if that's good or bad), there are just as many quality titles with more flexible cost, but they are smaller and more niche than ever before.

It says everything that all that effort was put into showing us the Crysis 2 engine running on consoles first, even though apparently the PC version is pushing tech forward again. Why wouldn't you show your game looking its absolute best? It was more important to Crytek to show scalability then high tech, in a world where that's the case, it's tough to focus on the PC. Cryostasis, a game that scored in the 60's on most sites was continually brought up by hermits, a sure sign something is lacking.

Buy a comfy chair and you will be set.

My computer chair is so comfy I could fall asleep in it.

Hakkai007

My chair is horrible for the back and I don't know when it will break :cry:

I do play PC games, but I don't really maintain a gaming rig.

My PC: Quad-Core 6600, GeForce 8500 GT, 3 GB Ram, bought off the shelf in late 2007, I believe.

For all of the "cost is a myth" talk, it really isn't in one sense. Today you can make a gaming rig as powerful as the 360 or PS3 for sub $500, but I have had my consoles since launch. At launch you could not even come remotely close to building a rig that could run Oblivion as good as it looked on the 360 for the $400 it cost.

This is the first generation where that statement was still true a year in, the consoles didn't date anywhere near as fast as they have in the past. Even two years in, late 2007-early 2008, it still cost around $1000 to make a 360 equivalent machine, add another $200-$250 back then for a Blu-Ray drive to get that particular functionality of the PS3. Crysis was interesting in that it showed just how stalled everything is, here we are two and a half years since its release and the PC hasn't matched it since, and what's more very, Very few people could even afford to run the thing the way it was meant to be played when it came out. "Why do you have to play it on max, consoles can't?" You don't, but why own a more expensive PC if all it can do is break even on resolution.

At the same time, big name PC developers began shifting their focus on to the consoles. When John Carmack said that the 360 was the primary development environment for Id's next big title, something is very, Very wrong in PC land. There hasn't been a year with a big budget, highly hyped and marketed release schedule on the PC that has matched the consoles since 2004. No this is not me claiming PC is dying or anything of the sort, but you have to be blind to notice it has a way lower profile. The releases are just as numerous if not more so, there is a big central hub in steam (not sure if that's good or bad), there are just as many quality titles with more flexible cost, but they are smaller and more niche than ever before.

It says everything that all that effort was put into showing us the Crysis 2 engine running on consoles first, even though apparently the PC version is pushing tech forward again. Why wouldn't you show your game looking its absolute best? It was more important to Crytek to show scalability then high tech, in a world where that's the case, it's tough to focus on the PC. Cryostasis, a game that scored in the 60's on most sites was continually brought up by hermits, a sure sign something is lacking.

Seiki_sands

Wrong on many levels.

I could build a PC today for around 500 that is more powerful than both the Xbox 360 and PS3 combined and can play Crysis on near max settings at 1680x1050 res.

That same PC back in 2007 was around 700 USD.

Also there are alot of Big budget titles it's just PC gamers don't need to hype their stuff.

Wrong on many levels.

I could build a PC today for around 500 that is more powerful than both the Xbox 360 and PS3 combined and can play Crysis on near max settings at 1680x1050 res.

That same PC back in 2007 was around 700 USD.

Also there are alot of Big budget titles it's just PC gamers don't need to hype their stuff.

Hakkai007

I never disagreed with your first statement, as a matter of fact I stated something similar, although less exaggerated, myself.

As for doing the same in 2007, I highly doubt that. Not if you were shopping at Newegg, not even if you were patient and only bought it piece at a time with their shocker deals, no, no, no. Not from what I remember.

The last statement about not needing to hype their stuff sounds more than a little desperate. Although I would point out I never exactly said it wasn't getting big budget games, and referred instead to the lack of big budget marketing and hype, I did say more and more PC games were small and niche (I was referring to mostly to games that are not console ports or vice versa in that respect, as obviously the PC gets most multi-platform games). I think I'm gonna go ahead and stand by that as well. Ensemble's last game was a 360 exclusive, Monolith is doing more on consoles than PC, Irrational is clearly Multi-Platform focused, Id's new home is apparently the 360, Remedy's new game is 360 exclusive, Simbin stopped making those lovely PC racing sims and went Multi-Platform with a Need for Speed title, and Crytek is more worried about showing off the scalability of their new engine for consoles than wowing PC gamers with the forward looking tech of their version. All of these premier developers were once completely at home on the PC, occasionally getting their products ported to consoles, but at home on the PC. Something has changed. New big studios are not replacing this loss. If I'm wrong about that, please name them (You might wanna avoid listing only RTS or WRPG developers, as I'm very likely to notice that).

The problem with PC is not power, it is that has no exclusive games to use it, since all are in consoles

[QUOTE="theseekar"]

Because simply put

PS3 +360 have all the best PC games

PC has none of PS3+360 best games

It is all about the games, and PC is vastly inferior in that

ronvalencia

I just want to game on my 46 inch HDTV while lounging on the couch with a controller in my hand. I also dont have the patience to build my own gaming rig. I like the simple things in life.:P Turn on the tv and console and just start playing.

coltsfan4ever

Indeed, a laptop helps, a 360 controller too, i played Whispered World on my HDTV and was stunning

As for PS3 / pC combo, i cant see why

With an old PC i can play all adventures i need

with 360 i wont miss on Alan Wake, Gears 3, Fable 3 and i get to play ALL PC games i want that my PC wont run(Mass Effect 2-3, Two Worlds 2, KUF2, Witcher 2etc)for just 199$

And of course my PS3 and Wii get their exclsuives like Demon Soul, Xenoblades, Muramasha, Zelda WW, Last Story, Last Guardianetc

So. i miss nothing and save 2000$ on PC harwdare, just for this genertion, not to mention the thousands i have saved from xbox days

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

Wrong on many levels.

I could build a PC today for around 500 that is more powerful than both the Xbox 360 and PS3 combined and can play Crysis on near max settings at 1680x1050 res.

That same PC back in 2007 was around 700 USD.

Also there are alot of Big budget titles it's just PC gamers don't need to hype their stuff.

Seiki_sands

I never disagreed with your first statement, as a matter of fact I stated something similar, although less exaggerated, myself.

As for doing the same in 2007, I highly doubt that. Not if you were shopping at Newegg, not even if you were patient and only bought it piece at a time with their shocker deals, no, no, no. Not from what I remember.

The last statement about not needing to hype their stuff sounds more than a little desperate.

Nah the PC I built in 2007 was around 750 USD and is now around 500 USD.

It can play just about any game at max setting 1680x1050 res.

And PC gamers don't general hype their games like the console people do mainly because we have no reason to over hype a game.

Developers usually share information with us so we know the final product and they have more care in listening to us.

If you want to see the 2010 list of PC games check here.

http://adrianwerner.wordpress.com/games-of-2010/

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="theseekar"] Personally, I'm thinking of PC-PS3 combo.

[QUOTE="coltsfan4ever"]

I just want to game on my 46 inch HDTV while lounging on the couch with a controller in my hand. I also dont have the patience to build my own gaming rig. I like the simple things in life.:P Turn on the tv and console and just start playing.

theseekar

Indeed, a laptop helps, a 360 controller too, i played Whispered World on my HDTV and was stunning

As for PS3 / pC combo, i cant see why

With an old PC i can play all adventures i need

with 360 i wont miss on Alan Wake, Gears 3, Fable 3 and i get to play ALL PC games i want that my PC wont run(Mass Effect 2-3, Two Worlds 2, KUF2, Witcher 2etc)for just 199$

And of course my PS3 and Wii get their exclsuives like Demon Soul, Xenoblades, Muramasha, Zelda WW, Last Story, Last Guardianetc

So. i miss nothing and save 2000$ on PC harwdare, just for this genertion, not to mention the thousands i have saved from xbox days

Why are people continually ignorant on PC hardware prices....

With the money you could save by buying the pc game versions you could buy a 100 dollar video card that can max out most of today's PC games.

The problem with PC is not power, it is that has no exclusive games to use it, since all are in consoles

theseekar

You're wrong, they've even been mentioned in this thread.

And even multi-plat games can be optimised to make use of additional processing power.

I prefer popping the disc in and just playing, too many bad experiences with PC games.

Also: Don't like RTS or MMO games. So that's a large amount of great PC games I have 0 interest in.

It's the whole interface thing. I would much prefer a controller - I'm just not used to a keyboard and mouse. I'm also not a fan of sitting so close to the game I'm playing' whereas with a console, you could just sit back and relax on a couch from further away. And I spent enough time on the computer already; I don't really need an excuse to be on my computer 24/7.

Why do people keep bringing up the arguement that they prefer a controller? I mean the PC is the most open source for using any controller out there. I have several ps2, ps3, 360, and ps1 controllers that can all be hooked to my system via usb. Thats a neglectable arguement there.

I have several friends who game on there PC's through hdtv's. Its really not a big problem to do and games can run just as good on a 60 hrtz mid range 32+ in hdtv then a 22 in lcd monitor whose resolution can be pushed higher.(I believe 32in lcdtv run around 1366x768 resolution?)

Its all about preference. I personally enjoy playing PC games for the game community last longer, great mods for racing games, games are nominally cheaper, my pc can do more at one time (i'm on 3 19in monitor and one am usually always running tv when i'm playing games on the other), opened controllers so its easy to setup my logitech g25, a multitude of great free games on PC such as planetside, trackmania, soldat, alliance of valiant arms, C&C, mechwarrio 4 etc etc, a back catalog of games is vaster then any console I have, and alot of dlc comes free to pc.

As someone stated, if you disregard one system, you will miss out on great titles for it. That is why I have a slim and a 360 elite as well.

Why do people keep bringing up the arguement that they prefer a controller? I mean the PC is the most open source for using any controller out there. I have several ps2, ps3, 360, and ps1 controllers that can all be hooked to my system via usb. Thats a neglectable arguement there.jedikevin2

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

Why do people keep bringing up the arguement that they prefer a controller? I mean the PC is the most open source for using any controller out there. I have several ps2, ps3, 360, and ps1 controllers that can all be hooked to my system via usb. Thats a neglectable arguement there.dc337

Playing with a controller works fine with me.

I can also rest the keyboard on my lap and the mouse on the couch and play perfectly fine.

I play UT 2004 in bed on my laptop and have no problem, it can be more comfortable than holding a controller.

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

Wrong on many levels.

I could build a PC today for around 500 that is more powerful than both the Xbox 360 and PS3 combined and can play Crysis on near max settings at 1680x1050 res.

That same PC back in 2007 was around 700 USD.

Also there are alot of Big budget titles it's just PC gamers don't need to hype their stuff.

Seiki_sands

I never disagreed with your first statement, as a matter of fact I stated something similar, although less exaggerated, myself.

As for doing the same in 2007, I highly doubt that. Not if you were shopping at Newegg, not even if you were patient and only bought it piece at a time with their shocker deals, no, no, no. Not from what I remember.

The last statement about not needing to hype their stuff sounds more than a little desperate. Although I would point out I never exactly said it wasn't getting big budget games, and referred instead to the lack of big budget marketing and hype, I did say more and more PC games were small and niche (I was referring to mostly to games that are not console ports or vice versa in that respect, as obviously the PC gets most multi-platform games). I think I'm gonna go ahead and stand by that as well. Ensemble's last game was a 360 exclusive, Monolith is doing more on consoles than PC, Irrational is clearly Multi-Platform focused, Id's new home is apparently the 360, Remedy's new game is 360 exclusive, Simbin stopped making those lovely PC racing sims and went Multi-Platform with a Need for Speed title, and Crytek is more worried about showing off the scalability of their new engine for consoles than wowing PC gamers with the forward looking tech of their version. All of these premier developers were once completely at home on the PC, occasionally getting their products ported to consoles, but at home on the PC. Something has changed. New big studios are not replacing this loss. If I'm wrong about that, please name them (You might wanna avoid listing only RTS or WRPG developers, as I'm very likely to notice that).

I'm also not a fan of sitting so close to the game I'm playing' whereas with a console, you could just sit back and relax on a couch from further away.

Jau11

While not picking you out directly, this seems to be the common perception of the PC experience...but it doesn't have to be. Many modern HDTVs have a VGA socket and audio jack in the back, so it's easy to hook a TV up to your computer (or with newer graphics card, an HDMI cable). My PC is parked next to my TV, and I just have to put the wireless keyboard/mouse receivers on the floor next to my sofa when I'm using it.

I originally connected my PC up to my TV for the amusement value (my new graphics card had an HDMI slot), I had intended to connect it back up to my monitor for that "close up" experience you speak of (since that is how I'd always done it). But I was so blown away by playing ME2 at max detail it has stayed there (JC2, Crysis...*Arghl*). Like you, I can sit and relax while playing games on my PC. The downside? The PC is twice as big as a console in every measurement - it's not a discrete piece of kit.

It's quite easy to move the PC on the console's "turf" now that graphics cards and TVs are much more sophisticated.

[QUOTE="dc337"]

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

Why do people keep bringing up the arguement that they prefer a controller? I mean the PC is the most open source for using any controller out there. I have several ps2, ps3, 360, and ps1 controllers that can all be hooked to my system via usb. Thats a neglectable arguement there.Hakkai007

Playing with a controller works fine with me.

I can also rest the keyboard on my lap and the mouse on the couch and play perfectly fine.

I play UT 2004 in bed on my laptop and have no problem, it can be more comfortable than holding a controller.

I'm willing to bet playing CS with a controller would result in a swift death...over and over...

Well offcourse it would be nimrod but you are getting specific. The whole argument from pages back is that you must use a keyboard and mouse. You actually don't. Offcourse I personally use keyboard and mouse on all my shooters but I also use a controller on racing sims, schumps, fighters, and a couple platformers. The option is there. Go read back nimrod some pages and see some peoples views and you will understand what was being said. jedikevin2

ah, kk in that case i get ya...(still not gonna read 38+ pages of system wars if you don't mind :P) I know you don't have to use a mouse/keyboard on pcs...

Playing with a controller works fine with me.

I can also rest the keyboard on my lap and the mouse on the couch and play perfectly fine.

I play UT 2004 in bed on my laptop and have no problem, it can be more comfortable than holding a controller.

Hakkai007

RTS games just plain suck with a controller, even the ones that have been ported to consoles. Turn-based strategy works great on consoles but RTS should be left on the pc.

The pc games that play well with a controller are multiplats that were designed for consoles. If the pc was treated as an equal to consoles by publishers then I think an argument could be made for living room pc gaming but the pc gets skipped on too many console exclusives. PC gaming in the living room is just kind of half assed console gaming. You miss some great exclusives and you have to spend more time configuring your system.

There also isn't a single pc exclusive that came out this year that I wanted to play on my HDTV. The only games on the pc that interest me these days are 2D adventure games and I prefer to play those in bed on my laptop. I would only put a desktop in the living room if I was really into RTS or MMOs.

People fail to understand that PC gaming has two main aspects. Freedom and choice. Got a PC? You can do anything (computational) with it. -Feath-

The pc games that play well with a controller are multiplats that were designed for consoles. If the pc was treated as an equal to consoles by publishers then I think an argument could be made for living room pc gaming but the pc gets skipped on too many console exclusives. PC gaming in the living room is just kind of half assed console gaming. You miss some great exclusives and you have to spend more time configuring your system.

dc337

They wouldn't be console exclusives if they were on the PC now, would they? As for 'half-assed', where's your proof? You're trying to compare a PC to a console and assuming that the PC is trying to be the console. Your bias is clouding the fact that the PC is a good system on a TV. I get exclusives, too - I don't want to play them all (I'm quite picky like that), but they exist nonetheless. Diversity is good, diversity is what happens with competing products, but that diversity isn't a weapon to beat the competition with.

And yes, it takes a little time to configure my system. What's your point? I get a good system from it, and I'm prepared to give up the time to do so.

There also isn't a single pc exclusive that came out this year that I wanted to play on my HDTV.

dc337

And fair play to you. But just because you don't find anything you like does not make what's on offer inferior. So let's see something a little less subjective, eh?

[QUOTE="Hakkai007"]

Playing with a controller works fine with me.

I can also rest the keyboard on my lap and the mouse on the couch and play perfectly fine.

I play UT 2004 in bed on my laptop and have no problem, it can be more comfortable than holding a controller.

dc337

RTS games just plain suck with a controller, even the ones that have been ported to consoles. Turn-based strategy works great on consoles but RTS should be left on the pc.

The pc games that play well with a controller are multiplats that were designed for consoles. If the pc was treated as an equal to consoles by publishers then I think an argument could be made for living room pc gaming but the pc gets skipped on too many console exclusives. PC gaming in the living room is just kind of half assed console gaming. You miss some great exclusives and you have to spend more time configuring your system.

There also isn't a single pc exclusive that came out this year that I wanted to play on my HDTV. The only games on the pc that interest me these days are 2D adventure games and I prefer to play those in bed on my laptop. I would only put a desktop in the living room if I was really into RTS or MMOs.

Already said playing with Keyboard and Mouse while laying down is comfortable and works fine.

Your bias is clouding the fact that the PC is a good system on a TV. I get exclusives, too - I don't want to play them all (I'm quite picky like that), but they exist nonetheless. LordRork

[QUOTE="LordRork"] Your bias is clouding the fact that the PC is a good system on a TV. I get exclusives, too - I don't want to play them all (I'm quite picky like that), but they exist nonetheless. dc337

Just about everything you say is subjective.

I play my PC games in my living room just fine, from the couch with a KB&M or a controller.

Your consoles miss out on good PC exclusives and higher res and better graphics and mods and longer lasting communities.

GTA IV is on the PC with better graphics and mods to make it even look better.

Sports Genre games are on the PC, and most fighting games are bland so I stick with Guilty Gear X2 Reload or BlazBlue.

There are some JRPGs on the PC but There are better Western RPGs on the PC like Dragon Age Origins which is bad on consoles.

I say the PC is better than both the PS3 and the 360 because of the long list of games, it can do much more like mods which increases a games longevity.

Some of the best games ever are PC exclusive.

No, for the typical video gamer the pc is not a good system for the living room. It misses out on too many console exclusives and too many pc exclusives are designed around mouse and keyboard.

dc337

*Chuckle* What? That's like criticising the 360 for having too many games that use the 360 controller - KB+M is the default control system for the PC, so unsurprisingly most PC games use it.

The typical gamer would regret purchasing a pc for the living room over a ps3 or 360. For some gamers like MMO addicts it would be worth it but for your typical gamer that plays games like Madden and GTA it's a waste of time.

dc337

It's not for everyone, and I'm not some PC evangelist saying that you should convert to the true path or some rubbish like that. But you're trying to argue by simply avoiding issues like consoles not being so great for RTS and similar. P.s. GTA is great on the PC in terms of quality of the game (the optimisation could do with some work, though).

As I said before if the pc was treated equally by publishers then the situation would be different but as it stands the pc is not an adequate replacement for either the ps3 or 360.

dc337

PC and consoles are very different. They co-exist, rather than compete - A PC is never going to replace a console for the vast majority of people (even if the consoles are taking on some "PC-like" qualities), but neither are the consoles ever going to be as flexible as the PC. The gaming industry just isn't that black and white.

[QUOTE="-Feath-"]People fail to understand that PC gaming has two main aspects. Freedom and choice. Got a PC? You can do anything (computational) with it. dc337

I think he was saying... that it's not just a gaming machine...

I prefer PC gaming by far but I can understand why PC gamers prefer consoles due to the ease of gaming on a console.
But consoles will NEVER give us the freedom of mods and changing the config files to suit us.
I am currently playing through deus ex that I bought from steam for £3.
I am playing it at 1920x1200 res on a directx 10 renderer and also a high definition texture pack, all created by modders.
This would never happen on a console due to the way microsoft and sony want to control the content for them. Giving modders access to the games on consoles would diminish any paid for DLC.
Also modders extend the gameplay and games and that's why PC games have such a long shelflife.
Play fallout 3 with some mods and you will see what I mean.
Also compare left for dead 2 at 1920x1200 with 4XAA and 16XAF to the 360 version, there's no comparison.
360 owners had to pay for the passing DLC, PC gamers got it for free.
Also console gaming for me is a pastime to waste a few hours, PC gaming is more of a hobby for me.
All this and I am married with kids and my own business.
PC gaming will never die for me.

[QUOTE="AdmiralRJW"]

may I ask, what is it that keeps you from playing PC exactly?

Ribnarak

warcraft 4 isnt out yet. IF it came out, i would quit console gaming.

It's a weird thread, why do you need people to justify their reasons to not be a pc gamer.