PC, better or worse than consoles?

(First, I want to mention I play on an Asus laptop for PC games and play console games mostly on the Xbox 360)

It's clear PC's can run games better than consoles. On every comparison you have PC fans saying, "Consoles suck. Anyone can buy a PC for $2,000 and you can run things for a about 2 years on High settings and then 3-4 years of Low-Medium settings." If this is the case, then you'll need to buy a better graphics card in about 4 years, which is slightly less than an average console cycle (most likely about half as long from now on). So technically if you want Medium-High settings, you'll need to dish out about $400 every 3 1/2 years, making PC's more expensive. I don't understand the arguement against consoles when PC fans say this because their arguements are clearly invalid. To run games better than a console, you'll need to pay more than a whole new console even faster than a whole generation cycle. If you don't get a new graphics card in about 2 years and run it on Medium settings, then the advantage to having a PC for the graphics and frame rates fades away. I just don't see the point in paying that much for slightly better graphics. But here are some PC comparisons to consoles:

Just kidding

But seriously, is it really worth paying more for slightly better graphics? I will say this in defense of PC's: Minecraft and Fallout 3 and New Vegas run MUCH better on a PC. I know laptops are often frowned upon in the PC community, however even on my not so powerful Asus, these games blow the 360 away. Hair and eye mods on Fallout change the entire game. Also PC has Steam (for the people who haven't experienced it yet, it truely does live up to its reputation. The sales are simply increadible.) Consoles also have many exclusives while PC games usuallty get ported to consoles later on. So what do you think?

Worth it for me, not just for graphics but overall performance

. Lol @ using low-res screenshots.Manservice

you really only need to look at the tomb raider one anyways, it gets the point across

Dude, my PC which has a 580 can still run everything on max. TC is wrong. clyde46

must be time for a $2000 upgrade

[QUOTE="clyde46"]Dude, my PC which has a 580 can still run everything on max. TC is wrong. lostrib

must be time for a $2000 upgrade

It's worth it to me. 

The differences are greater in person. Online you don't really notice it as much. 

Worth it for me, not just for graphics but overall performance

lostrib

This. Graphics being much better on PC is nice and all, but the real draw is the performance, mods, and mouse/keyboard controls.

tl;dr

its worth it, can you browse the web effectivley on console, while multi tasking a million other programs? 

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="clyde46"]Dude, my PC which has a 580 can still run everything on max. TC is wrong. clyde46

must be time for a $2000 upgrade

Probably getting by paycheck to paycheck to afford upgrading every year and replacing all those parts that don't have warrantees

It's worth it to me. 

The differences are greater in person. Online you don't really notice it as much. 

gameofthering

Yeah I noticed that with Fallout. I just see that more recent games are looking closer and closer to high end PC's, and while the PC is still better in many ways, I think the gap is closing much faster than expected.

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="lostrib"]

must be time for a $2000 upgrade

lostrib

Probably getting by paycheck to paycheck to afford upgrading every year and replacing all those parts that don't have warrantees

I have some friends that are still using 8800 gt's and they plan on upgrading towards 700 series nvidua gpus soon as they're out.  So by then, it's taken them 8 years before they upgraded, making your horrible thread invalid.

Not to mention games on pc are much cheaper, with crazy pc games sales all over the place at almost all times.  You spend alot more money on console gaming, especially if you build a decent rig with a budget.

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="clyde46"] Good thing I have a job. Liquid_

Probably getting by paycheck to paycheck to afford upgrading every year and replacing all those parts that don't have warrantees

yes...I'm the slow one

Dude, my PC which has a 580 can still run everything on max. TC is wrong. clyde46

570.. same here, all max. bf3 still sucking on  it

PC is much better, beyond the graphics/performance thing we have mods which literally as a point of it's own blows away consoles.

Also, I haven't upgraded in 3 years and still play everything on max...or in the rare game that really taxes my system at almost max (which is still well above anything a console can push). I also NEVER have spent $2000 on a PC. Everytime I upgrade it's basically a forklift upgrade, and rarely costs me over $800.

I still like consoles though, and have owned at least one every generation since the original NES.  Just compared to a PC?  Well, there's no comparision ;)

[QUOTE="gameofthering"]

It's worth it to me. 

The differences are greater in person. Online you don't really notice it as much. 

Oozyrat

Yeah I noticed that with Fallout. I just see that more recent games are looking closer and closer to high end PC's, and while the PC is still better in many ways, I think the gap is closing much faster than expected.

You gotta look at more than just graphics

pros and cons to everything...

Do I consider it worth it? Yes, and not just for the vastly better graphics. First off, there seems to be a more demanding PC audience, thus we get good ports that allow you to customize the game as much as you want. For instance, in a lot of games like Dishonored or Far Cry 3, the PC version includes the ability to turn off various parts of the HUD. You can also adjust the FOV and various other aspects of the game. 

In addition, I just happen to really love a lot of PC exclusives, although I should make it clear that I despise the notion of platform exclusivity. If that exclusivity is grounded on a solid principle (like the game just not controlling well with a controller), then that's ok, or if the developer simply cannot afford to port the game to consoles due to financial or technical reasons. But exclusivity for the sake of exclusivity annoys me to no end. Everybody should have the ability to experience great games. 

[QUOTE="Liquid_"][QUOTE="lostrib"]

Probably getting by paycheck to paycheck to afford upgrading every year and replacing all those parts that don't have warrantees

lostrib

yes...I'm the slow one

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Liquid_"] most computer parts come with a 3+ year warranty, you must be slowLiquid_

yes...I'm the slow one

Ah, this is the trolling I've heard so much about? yes?

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Liquid_"] most computer parts come with a 3+ year warranty, you must be slowLiquid_

yes...I'm the slow one

Consoles also have many exclusives while PC games usuallty get ported to consoles later on. So what do you think?

Oozyrat

I barely noticed this.  Now I know you either must be trolling, or are extremely pro console bias.

You do realize pc has more exclusives than all the consoles combined right?

GTFO

[QUOTE="Manservice"]. Lol @ using low-res screenshots.lostrib

you really only need to look at the tomb raider one anyways, it gets the point across

Lol at the pic

But yeah the Tomb Raider image really shows the difference, but is hair and shadows really going to make the enjoyment go that much higher? And yeah I think the use of high res images was pretty irrelevent, they all show the differences and I wasn't going to waste my time with images that would barely get my point across better. Smaller, low res images, work better on forums anyways imo.

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Manservice"]. Lol @ using low-res screenshots.Oozyrat

you really only need to look at the tomb raider one anyways, it gets the point across

Lol at the pic

But yeah the Tomb Raider image really shows the difference, but is hair and shadows really going to make the enjoyment go that much higher? And yeah I think the use of high res images was pretty irrelevent, they all show the differences and I wasn't going to waste my time with images that would barely get my point across better. Smaller, low res images, work better on forums anyways imo.

actually they would help because you could also see that the PC pics are at a higher resolution than the console ones.  You can resize the pics for the forum and then people right click to view the full image.

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Manservice"]. Lol @ using low-res screenshots.Oozyrat

you really only need to look at the tomb raider one anyways, it gets the point across

Lol at the pic

But yeah the Tomb Raider image really shows the difference, but is hair and shadows really going to make the enjoyment go that much higher? And yeah I think the use of high res images was pretty irrelevent, they all show the differences and I wasn't going to waste my time with images that would barely get my point across better. Smaller, low res images, work better on forums anyways imo.

Butthurt unsecure consolites make another thread to justify their immensely inferior gaming :lol: Seriously, have a bit of dignity.

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

Consoles also have many exclusives while PC games usuallty get ported to consoles later on. So what do you think?

Rage010101

I barely noticed this.  Now I know you either must be trolling, or are extremely pro console bias.

You do realize pc has more exclusives than all the consoles combined right?

GTFO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_exclusives_%28seventh_generation%29

That shows just how many games are exclusive to PS3 and 360. Not to mention I researched PC exclusives and almost all were RTS's. Also, PC exclusive lists were limited to usually 50 titles. The most note worthy games are Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3. If you want to count unheard of Indie games and RTS's, then you might get the amount of exclusives you said, but major titles are lacking on the PC. I'm definitely not console bias, but when it comes to exclusives, I will admit I prefer almost all of the console exclusives when compared to PC exclusives. Despite this though, I prefer to play RPG's and platformers on PC. Saying that I'm bias is by far incorrect, and doesn't get a point across at all.

The PC is much better, and would be worth it for the exclusives alone.PurpleMan5000

This.  People forget that PC has some pretty amazing exclussives that will never come to consoles.  

[QUOTE="Rage010101"]

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

Consoles also have many exclusives while PC games usuallty get ported to consoles later on. So what do you think?

Oozyrat

I barely noticed this.  Now I know you either must be trolling, or are extremely pro console bias.

You do realize pc has more exclusives than all the consoles combined right?

GTFO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_exclusives_%28seventh_generation%29

That shows just how many games are exclusive to PS3 and 360. Not to mention I researched PC exclusives and almost all were RTS's. Also, PC exclusive lists were limited to usually 50 titles. The most note worthy games are Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3. If you want to count unheard of Indie games and RTS's, then you might get the amount of exclusives you said, but major titles are lacking on the PC. I'm definitely not console bias, but when it comes to exclusives, I will admit I prefer almost all of the console exclusives when compared to PC exclusives. Despite this though, I prefer to play RPG's and platformers on PC. Saying that I'm bias is by far incorrect, and doesn't get a point across at all.

you cant just disqualify certain genres becase you don't consider them "major" titles. We don't just count major titles, which I assume you mean big budget games

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

you really only need to look at the tomb raider one anyways, it gets the point across

lostrib

Lol at the pic

But yeah the Tomb Raider image really shows the difference, but is hair and shadows really going to make the enjoyment go that much higher? And yeah I think the use of high res images was pretty irrelevent, they all show the differences and I wasn't going to waste my time with images that would barely get my point across better. Smaller, low res images, work better on forums anyways imo.

actually they would help because you could also see that the PC pics are at a higher resolution than the console ones.  You can resize the pics for the forum and then people right click to view the full image.

Like I said, you can see the difference without high res images. My point was made clear enough in the images I posted, and they weren't even nessessary. I mentioned at the very beginning of the post that it is common knowledge that PC's run games better. The argument isn't about how much better they run games, the argument is if it is worth putting more money out for that difference. The images were soley there to add some color and examples to a forum for presentation and enjoyment, not to become a main point in the forum.

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

Lol at the pic

But yeah the Tomb Raider image really shows the difference, but is hair and shadows really going to make the enjoyment go that much higher? And yeah I think the use of high res images was pretty irrelevent, they all show the differences and I wasn't going to waste my time with images that would barely get my point across better. Smaller, low res images, work better on forums anyways imo.

Oozyrat

actually they would help because you could also see that the PC pics are at a higher resolution than the console ones.  You can resize the pics for the forum and then people right click to view the full image.

Like I said, you can see the difference without high res images. My point was made clear enough in the images I posted, and they weren't even nessessary. I mentioned at the very beginning of the post that it is common knowledge that PC's run games better. The argument isn't about how much better they run games, the argument is if it is worth putting more money out for that difference. The images were soley there to add some color and examples to a forum for presentation and enjoyment, not to become a main point in the forum.

For me,yes it is worth the cost

[QUOTE="Rage010101"]

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

Consoles also have many exclusives while PC games usuallty get ported to consoles later on. So what do you think?

Oozyrat

I barely noticed this.  Now I know you either must be trolling, or are extremely pro console bias.

You do realize pc has more exclusives than all the consoles combined right?

GTFO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_exclusives_%28seventh_generation%29

That shows just how many games are exclusive to PS3 and 360. Not to mention I researched PC exclusives and almost all were RTS's. Also, PC exclusive lists were limited to usually 50 titles. The most note worthy games are Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3. If you want to count unheard of Indie games and RTS's, then you might get the amount of exclusives you said, but major titles are lacking on the PC. I'm definitely not console bias, but when it comes to exclusives, I will admit I prefer almost all of the console exclusives when compared to PC exclusives. Despite this though, I prefer to play RPG's and platformers on PC. Saying that I'm bias is by far incorrect, and doesn't get a point across at all.

Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3.

Hmmmm. Only 4 games ? No Total War, Civilization, point and click adventures, horror games like Amnesia, wrpgs, indie games? No ? Nothing comes to mind at all ?

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

[QUOTE="Rage010101"]

I barely noticed this.  Now I know you either must be trolling, or are extremely pro console bias.

You do realize pc has more exclusives than all the consoles combined right?

GTFO

lostrib

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_exclusives_%28seventh_generation%29

That shows just how many games are exclusive to PS3 and 360. Not to mention I researched PC exclusives and almost all were RTS's. Also, PC exclusive lists were limited to usually 50 titles. The most note worthy games are Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3. If you want to count unheard of Indie games and RTS's, then you might get the amount of exclusives you said, but major titles are lacking on the PC. I'm definitely not console bias, but when it comes to exclusives, I will admit I prefer almost all of the console exclusives when compared to PC exclusives. Despite this though, I prefer to play RPG's and platformers on PC. Saying that I'm bias is by far incorrect, and doesn't get a point across at all.

you cant just disqualify certain genres becase you don't consider them "major" titles. We don't just count major titles, which I assume you mean big budget games

If you count "minor" titles, then you'd have to count XBLA games and the such. Yes, you could say I meant big budget games (which do NOT make them good games, I think we were shown that in 2011-2013 :P ). However, I believe diversity does matter when it comes to exclusives. If a large majority of the games are the same genre, then fans of that platform most likely won't buy every single one of them. If it's diverse, then they will probably buy many more of the titles.

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_exclusives_%28seventh_generation%29

That shows just how many games are exclusive to PS3 and 360. Not to mention I researched PC exclusives and almost all were RTS's. Also, PC exclusive lists were limited to usually 50 titles. The most note worthy games are Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3. If you want to count unheard of Indie games and RTS's, then you might get the amount of exclusives you said, but major titles are lacking on the PC. I'm definitely not console bias, but when it comes to exclusives, I will admit I prefer almost all of the console exclusives when compared to PC exclusives. Despite this though, I prefer to play RPG's and platformers on PC. Saying that I'm bias is by far incorrect, and doesn't get a point across at all.

Oozyrat

you cant just disqualify certain genres becase you don't consider them "major" titles. We don't just count major titles, which I assume you mean big budget games

If you count "minor" titles, then you'd have to count XBLA games and the such. Yes, you could say I meant big budget games (which do NOT make them good games, I think we were shown that in 2011-2013 :P ). However, I believe diversity does matter when it comes to exclusives. If a large majority of the games are the same genre, then fans of that platform most likely won't buy every single one of them. If it's diverse, then they will probably buy many more of the titles.

I believe the PC still has more exclusives than any other single system, even if you include XBLA or PSN games.  Also, PC probably has the greatest variety of games

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

you cant just disqualify certain genres becase you don't consider them "major" titles. We don't just count major titles, which I assume you mean big budget games

lostrib

If you count "minor" titles, then you'd have to count XBLA games and the such. Yes, you could say I meant big budget games (which do NOT make them good games, I think we were shown that in 2011-2013 :P ). However, I believe diversity does matter when it comes to exclusives. If a large majority of the games are the same genre, then fans of that platform most likely won't buy every single one of them. If it's diverse, then they will probably buy many more of the titles.

I believe the PC still has more exclusives than any other single system, even if you include XBLA or PSN games.  Also, PC probably has the greatest variety of games

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

[QUOTE="Rage010101"]

I barely noticed this.  Now I know you either must be trolling, or are extremely pro console bias.

You do realize pc has more exclusives than all the consoles combined right?

GTFO

jhonMalcovich

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_exclusives_%28seventh_generation%29

That shows just how many games are exclusive to PS3 and 360. Not to mention I researched PC exclusives and almost all were RTS's. Also, PC exclusive lists were limited to usually 50 titles. The most note worthy games are Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3. If you want to count unheard of Indie games and RTS's, then you might get the amount of exclusives you said, but major titles are lacking on the PC. I'm definitely not console bias, but when it comes to exclusives, I will admit I prefer almost all of the console exclusives when compared to PC exclusives. Despite this though, I prefer to play RPG's and platformers on PC. Saying that I'm bias is by far incorrect, and doesn't get a point across at all.

Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3.

Hmmmm. Only 4 games ? No Total War, Civilization, point and click adventures, horror games like Amnesia, wrpgs, indie games? No ? Nothing comes to mind at all ?

I was mentioning games of different genres. Of course there many other titles out there, and yes Amnesia is an amazing game, but Total War, Civilization, Galactic Battlegrounds (still awesome), and Empire at War are all RTS's like Starcraft.  Point and click games are on consoles though, but not as many of course. My point is that there is a very large and diverse exclusive list for consoles, and saying that the PC has a larger list of exclusives than all consoles consoles combined probably is not true. Even if it is, it's most likely filled with titles that are a lot less known than games like Halo, Gears of War, Journey, Garden of Eden, Killzone, Infamous, and Uncharted.

The PC is much better, and would be worth it for the exclusives alone.PurpleMan5000

[QUOTE="PurpleMan5000"]The PC is much better, and would be worth it for the exclusives alone.ZoomZoom2490

False

Depends on the game and genre. Consoles can't play either Civilization or Roller Coaster Tycoon , so I prefer PC for both...

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Oozyrat"]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_exclusives_%28seventh_generation%29

That shows just how many games are exclusive to PS3 and 360. Not to mention I researched PC exclusives and almost all were RTS's. Also, PC exclusive lists were limited to usually 50 titles. The most note worthy games are Starcraft, Team Fortress 2, Half Life, and Sims 3. If you want to count unheard of Indie games and RTS's, then you might get the amount of exclusives you said, but major titles are lacking on the PC. I'm definitely not console bias, but when it comes to exclusives, I will admit I prefer almost all of the console exclusives when compared to PC exclusives. Despite this though, I prefer to play RPG's and platformers on PC. Saying that I'm bias is by far incorrect, and doesn't get a point across at all.

Oozyrat

you cant just disqualify certain genres becase you don't consider them "major" titles. We don't just count major titles, which I assume you mean big budget games

If you count "minor" titles, then you'd have to count XBLA games and the such. Yes, you could say I meant big budget games (which do NOT make them good games, I think we were shown that in 2011-2013 :P ). However, I believe diversity does matter when it comes to exclusives. If a large majority of the games are the same genre, then fans of that platform most likely won't buy every single one of them. If it's diverse, then they will probably buy many more of the titles.

Then give us a list of console exclusives you consider relevant. Consoles have as many crappy games as PC. Listing all indie games on PC wwould easily take a few pages. Will you tell us that all XBL games are AAA:lol: 

[QUOTE="PurpleMan5000"]The PC is much better, and would be worth it for the exclusives alone.ZoomZoom2490

Consoles didn´t have a decent exclusive since Mario NES then :lol:

You have to remember that, at the end of the day, you are paying to play games  better, and not  the same. Furthermore, PC's simply offer more than consoles, outside of looking solely at games.

It isn't just marginal, either, given that you are playing at drastically higher resolutions, and potentially 2x the fps... If not more. Certain games have  amarginal difference... Others just have opposing fanboys claiming that. Hell, ShadowMoses' Far Cry 3 picture comparison was scrumptiosly delicious in its hilarity.