PC gaming is far superior to Console gaming

How is it cheaper? I paid 400 bucks for my 360... and 2,000 for the computer.. Not to mention my internet bill is way higher than the xbox live is.. soooo I don't see how its any better.. Plus you have to worry about the games not working with your puter and what always happened to me is I never got to finish a game cause some genius would mess up my computer and I'd have to format it... its just a head ache for me.. but that's just my opinion. reign_six6six

You paid $2000 for a computer? That's your fault, not PC gamings fault, you wasted your money.

You're going to pay for your internet bill regardless whether you play PC games or not. I know this because you said you are paying for xbox live, which requires an internet connection.

I don't have to worry about my games working, if you do then that's your fault and your own stupidity. My games never crash and the myth that PC games crash regularly was fabricated by people just trying to bash PC gaming. It's also funny how you are trying to argue hardware/software reliability when you are using a 360.

I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.Andrew_Xavier

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.skrat_01

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

It's obvious he made up the story to take a shot at PC gaming, how else can you explain all the contradictions?

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.skrat_01

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

GeForce 8600 GTS XXX, it stuggles running crysis for sure, but, older top level games, such as the guild 2 struggle as well.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.mudman91878

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

It's obvious he made up the story to take a shot at PC gaming, how else can you explain all the contradictions?

*sigh* I'm almost tired of posting pictures to prove something, you have any negative experience on this board, and bang, photos needed, well, I'm too lazy, so, here's one I used to prove I bought Halo 3, bought a PC game at the same time *shivers* the horror of actually being a legitimate complainer.

Hey wait, is that a receipt from a legitimate pc game purchase? No way! Was he looking up the requirements for Assassin's Creed on the PC at the same time? No, no, that can't be, all people who have access to a platform have to 100% love it and defend it to the death! Legit complaint?!?! What a stupid concept!

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.Andrew_Xavier

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

GeForce 8600 GTS XXX, it stuggles running crysis for sure, but, older top level games, such as the guild 2 struggle as well.

And to think that a low end budget card - even when it came out - would play Crysis well is simply silly.... The 8800 series, like the GT which are priced in the mid range to budget range run it perfectly on high settings.

I dont know what the Guild 2 is though.

[QUOTE="Click_Clock"]You know, there are far better platformer games on PC with better controls such as Psychonauts. Consolites are so brainwashed. . .Pro_wrestler

Psychonauts is on Xbox.

I like PC gaming, and console gaming. If your PC is beefy, then yeah, it's better than the consoles. But I gotta tell you, it costs a lot more to build a PC, regardless of what some have said here.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.Andrew_Xavier

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

GeForce 8600 GTS XXX, it stuggles running crysis for sure, but, older top level games, such as the guild 2 struggle as well.

Thats a budget card that is inferior to my 7900gt which was released over 2 years ago, the only thing your card has over mine is Dx10 support. Also mid range 8800s were hardly expensive 6 months ago so how your 8600 was expensive a year after its release is a little baffling.

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.pieatorium

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

GeForce 8600 GTS XXX, it stuggles running crysis for sure, but, older top level games, such as the guild 2 struggle as well.

Thats a budget card that is inferior to my 7900gt which was released over 2 years ago, the only thing your card has over mine is Dx10 support. Also mid range 8800s were hardly expensive 6 months ago so how your 8600 was expensive a year after its release is a little baffling.

Neat, except, the 8600GTS XXX was released April 17th 2007, therefore hasn't been out for a year at this point, nevermind out a year and 7 months.

Über chocolaty cake>>>>>all pie

[QUOTE="pieatorium"][QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]I'm pissed about my expensive graphics card that I bought 7 months ago being all ready obsolete, and not good enough to play the new top level games on high. Seriously, I'm thinking of retiring to only console gaming, it's just easier, and I don't care about graphics.Andrew_Xavier

And if you 'dont care about graphics' then why are you so peeved about you card being 'not good enough to play the new top level games on high'? Double standards..............

And what 'new top level games' are you talking about? Right now a 7 month old expensive graphics card would only get stressed by Crysis.... That is all.....

GeForce 8600 GTS XXX, it stuggles running crysis for sure, but, older top level games, such as the guild 2 struggle as well.

Thats a budget card that is inferior to my 7900gt which was released over 2 years ago, the only thing your card has over mine is Dx10 support. Also mid range 8800s were hardly expensive 6 months ago so how your 8600 was expensive a year after its release is a little baffling.

Neat, except, the 8600GTS XXX was released April 17th 2007, therefore hasn't been out for a year at this point, nevermind out a year and 7 months.

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

pieatorium

It was over $200 and came with DDR3, and we were lead to believe that it was a good solid card, the 8600GT is the budget card BTW

[QUOTE="pieatorium"]

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

Andrew_Xavier

It was over $200 and came with DDR3, and we were lead to believe that it was a good solid card, the 8600GT is the budget card BTW

The 8600/8500 series are budget series of cards all are low end versions of the 8800s and all of the benchmarks/reviews ive seen of the 8600 series said that they were dissapointing performance wise and only worth it over 7900s if you wanted DX10 support.

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="pieatorium"]

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

pieatorium

It was over $200 and came with DDR3, and we were lead to believe that it was a good solid card, the 8600GT is the budget card BTW

The 8600/8500 series are budget series of cards all are low end versions of the 8800s and all of the benchmarks/reviews ive seen of the 8600 series said that they were dissapointing performance wise and only worth it over 7900s if you wanted DX10 support.

You ought to look up those again, the 8600GTS XXX opened at $310, and destroyed the 7 series in benchmark tests.

If $310 is cheap/low end, how the heck much is it for "good" cards?

[QUOTE="pieatorium"][QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="pieatorium"]

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

Andrew_Xavier

It was over $200 and came with DDR3, and we were lead to believe that it was a good solid card, the 8600GT is the budget card BTW

The 8600/8500 series are budget series of cards all are low end versions of the 8800s and all of the benchmarks/reviews ive seen of the 8600 series said that they were dissapointing performance wise and only worth it over 7900s if you wanted DX10 support.

You ought to look up those again, the 8600GTS XXX opened at $310, and destroyed the 7 series in benchmark tests.

If $310 is cheap/low end, how the heck much is it for "good" cards?

My 8800GT was $300 AUD - weeks after it came out in Australia (mind you it was a huge pain finding the card because of stock shortages). Im guessing the US price was even cheaper....

I went from an X850pro to that and everything has been dandy....

[QUOTE="pieatorium"][QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="pieatorium"]

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

Andrew_Xavier

It was over $200 and came with DDR3, and we were lead to believe that it was a good solid card, the 8600GT is the budget card BTW

The 8600/8500 series are budget series of cards all are low end versions of the 8800s and all of the benchmarks/reviews ive seen of the 8600 series said that they were dissapointing performance wise and only worth it over 7900s if you wanted DX10 support.

You ought to look up those again, the 8600GTS XXX opened at $310, and destroyed the 7 series in benchmark tests.

If $310 is cheap/low end, how the heck much is it for "good" cards?

You paid $310 for a 8600gts? You got ripped off.

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="pieatorium"][QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="pieatorium"]

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

slickchris7777

It was over $200 and came with DDR3, and we were lead to believe that it was a good solid card, the 8600GT is the budget card BTW

The 8600/8500 series are budget series of cards all are low end versions of the 8800s and all of the benchmarks/reviews ive seen of the 8600 series said that they were dissapointing performance wise and only worth it over 7900s if you wanted DX10 support.

You ought to look up those again, the 8600GTS XXX opened at $310, and destroyed the 7 series in benchmark tests.

If $310 is cheap/low end, how the heck much is it for "good" cards?

You paid $310 for a 8600gts? You got ripped off.

GTS XXX, but no, I didn't, that was the MSRP, I shop at tigerdirect, they are always way below MSRP

[QUOTE="pieatorium"][QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"][QUOTE="pieatorium"]

Oh so sorry i thought they released at the same time as the 8800, still doesn't change the fact that you bought low end card that was "obsolete" before it was even released and are now complaining that it's "obsolete".

Andrew_Xavier

It was over $200 and came with DDR3, and we were lead to believe that it was a good solid card, the 8600GT is the budget card BTW

The 8600/8500 series are budget series of cards all are low end versions of the 8800s and all of the benchmarks/reviews ive seen of the 8600 series said that they were dissapointing performance wise and only worth it over 7900s if you wanted DX10 support.

You ought to look up those again, the 8600GTS XXX opened at $310, and destroyed the 7 series in benchmark tests.

If $310 is cheap/low end, how the heck much is it for "good" cards?

OK maybe i went a bit over the top saying it was inferior to 7900 gt however the majority of 8600s are. You have the highest grade low end card that hardly destroyed the 7 series and as i couldn't find a direct benchmark comparison had less than a 20% performance jump in 3dmark06 over the 7900gt xxx and thats with a better cpu in the test. Destroyed is what the 8800s did to the 7 series. The 8800 gts 320mb absolutely destroys the anything the 7 sereis had and also destroys the 8600 gts xxx in the 3dmark 06 benchmarks using a cpu below the one used for the 8600 bench the difference was over 45% performance increase, this card was released at the same time as your card and cost less than $300 when you bought your card http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTM1MSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA== and costs less than $150 now http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130082

$300 - $400 is what a good mid range card goes for these days when its released (the newly released 9800gtx are in that range http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010380048+106792522+1067938081&name=GeForce+9800+GTX ) you just didnt buy a GOOD mid range card. The main point of all this has been about the fact that your expensive card wasn't that expensive when you bought it, wasn't what you wanted (you obviously wanted a card to play crysis on), there were better options in similar price range, and it was obsolete when you bought it.

I didn't mean to get into an argument over this but there are alot of threads where people tell there PC horor storie here and the thing most hermits say alot is to do a little research before you make a purchase so you get exactly what you need/want.

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]

[QUOTE="Click_Clock"]You know, there are far better platformer games on PC with better controls such as Psychonauts. Consolites are so brainwashed. . .donalbane

Psychonauts is on Xbox.

I like PC gaming, and console gaming. If your PC is beefy, then yeah, it's better than the consoles. But I gotta tell you, it costs a lot more to build a PC, regardless of what some have said here.

I prefer mouse over joysticks. Why? Because first, you can map the keyboard to anything you want. Don't like WASD, change it to something else. Customizable keys are few in console games. More buttons also means more options. Second is mouse. Mouse is defintely more accurate and more sensitive to joysticks. You can do a 360 with a simple swipe. For joysticks you need at least a second. I know that you can change joystick sensitivity but think about this. If your target moves even a little and your joystick is the highest sensitivity then you're gonna have a hard time pulling off headshots. If your target moves a lot and your joystick is the lowest sensitivity, you're gonna struggle to keep up. For mice, some even have on the spot DPI controls so that you can adjust mouse settings without exiting or pausing the game.

For these reasons, mouse and keyboard (imo) is perfect for RTS, FPS, and basically any thing that requires fast accurate pointers.

I can name 2 or 3 good PC games but I can name 100s exclusive games on consoles. Plus, those who say, FPS is better on PC are wrong. This equation used to be true but damn I played COD4 on both PC and PS3, and I found myself WAYYYYYY better with the controller same goes with other FPS games like, Resistance and Vegas. Graphically, Crysis has the edge but it's the only game on the PC that has the edge(GRAPHICALLY only, not to mention how it sucks comparing to COD4's multiplayer + gameplay) over consoles(we have yet to experience Killzone 2 which looks FANTASTIC). Most consoles games(excluding the wii) looks far better than most PC games, like I said, Crysis is the only game that has the edge graphically. PS3 online is free btw TC. I have played COD4 on an 8800 card and played it on an HDTV on the PS3 and I liked the PS3 version more, plus the framerate is steadier on the PS3 version. This goes with COD4 only, I don't know about other multiplatforms. Moving on to RTS games, sure the PC wins if the consoles version are being played with a controller but since PS3 supports both keyboard & mouse what makes the PC version better??? Can't wait for Red Alert 3.

PS: UT3 was the first game on PS3 to utilize Keyboard and Mouse but I prefered the controller, again, not to mention the rumble support from the DUALSHOCK 3.

I chose PS3 over PC for the following reasons:

-Free online.(Not all PC games are FREE online, WoW for instance)
-Blu-ray player, which is the best in the market with the latest BD-Live upgrade.
-OS support, I got LINUX installed on my PS3, thus a computer.
-Online marketplace, PS Store.
-Home
-DVD upscaler
-Splitscreen and VOIP support in all games.
-Adventures, racing, RPG and sports games are better on consoles.
-Cheaper.

I can name 2 or 3 good PC games but I can name 100s exclusive games on consoles. Plus, those who say, FPS is better on PC are wrong. This equation used to be true but damn I played COD4 on both PC and PS3, and I found myself WAYYYYYY better with the controller same goes with other FPS games like, Resistance and Vegas. Graphically, Crysis has the edge but it's the only game on the PC that has the edge(GRAPHICALLY only, not to mention how it sucks comparing to COD4's multiplayer + gameplay) over consoles(we have yet to experience Killzone 2 which looks FANTASTIC). Most consoles games(excluding the wii) looks far better than most PC games, like I said, Crysis is the only game that has the edge graphically. PS3 online is free btw TC. I have played COD4 on an 8800 card and played it on an HDTV on the PS3 and I liked the PS3 version more, plus the framerate is steadier on the PS3 version. This goes with COD4 only, I don't know about other multiplatforms. Moving on to RTS games, sure the PC wins if the consoles version are being played with a controller but since PS3 supports both keyboard & mouse what makes the PC version better??? Can't wait for Red Alert 3.

PS: UT3 was the first game on PS3 to utilize Keyboard and Mouse but I prefered the controller, again, not to mention the rumble support from the DUALSHOCK 3.

I chose PS3 over PC for the following reasons:

-Free online.(Not all PC games are FREE online, WoW for instance)
-Blu-ray player, which is the best in the market with the latest BD-Live upgrade.
-OS support, I got LINUX installed on my PS3, thus a computer.
-Online marketplace, PS Store.
-Home
-DVD upscaler
-Splitscreen and VOIP support in all games.
-Adventures, racing, RPG and sports games are better on consoles.
-Cheaper.
-MGS4

I can name 2 or 3 good PC games but I can name 100s exclusive games on consoles. Plus, those who say, FPS is better on PC are wrong. This equation used to be true but damn I played COD4 on both PC and PS3, and I found myself WAYYYYYY better with the controller same goes with other FPS games like, Resistance and Vegas. Graphically, Crysis has the edge but it's the only game on the PC that has the edge(GRAPHICALLY only, not to mention how it sucks comparing to COD4's multiplayer + gameplay) over consoles(we have yet to experience Killzone 2 which looks FANTASTIC). Most consoles games(excluding the wii) looks far better than most PC games, like I said, Crysis is the only game that has the edge graphically. PS3 online is free btw TC. I have played COD4 on an 8800 card and played it on an HDTV on the PS3 and I liked the PS3 version more, plus the framerate is steadier on the PS3 version. This goes with COD4 only, I don't know about other multiplatforms. Moving on to RTS games, sure the PC wins if the consoles version are being played with a controller but since PS3 supports both keyboard & mouse what makes the PC version better??? Can't wait for Red Alert 3.

PS: UT3 was the first game on PS3 to utilize Keyboard and Mouse but I prefered the controller, again, not to mention the rumble support from the DUALSHOCK 3.

I chose PS3 over PC for the following reasons:

-Free online.(Not all PC games are FREE online, WoW for instance) WoW is an MMO, if the PS3 had a MMO, you'd pay.
-Blu-ray player, which is the best in the market with the latest BD-Live upgrade. Not up on BD, so I am unsure, but I am sure that a PC can easily accomadate this.
-OS support, I got LINUX installed on my PS3, thus a computer. You tried installing a PC game on it? Can't, can you? Not a PC, not even close.
-Online marketplace, PS Store. lol @ this one, you think you can't buy stuff on a PC?
-Home Second Life. :P
-DVD upscaler
-Splitscreen and VOIP support in all games. This is up to devs, not the system.
-Adventures, racing, RPG and sports games are better on consoles. Opinion.
-Cheaper. Agreed, but you can do more with a PC.
-MGS4 100% aggre with this.

AgentH

I can name 2 or 3 good PC games but I can name 100s exclusive games on consoles. Plus, those who say, FPS is better on PC are wrong. This equation used to be true but damn I played COD4 on both PC and PS3, and I found myself WAYYYYYY better with the controller same goes with other FPS games like, Resistance and Vegas. Graphically, Crysis has the edge but it's the only game on the PC that has the edge(GRAPHICALLY only, not to mention how it sucks comparing to COD4's multiplayer + gameplay) over consoles(we have yet to experience Killzone 2 which looks FANTASTIC). Most consoles games(excluding the wii) looks far better than most PC games, like I said, Crysis is the only game that has the edge graphically. PS3 online is free btw TC. I have played COD4 on an 8800 card and played it on an HDTV on the PS3 and I liked the PS3 version more, plus the framerate is steadier on the PS3 version. This goes with COD4 only, I don't know about other multiplatforms. Moving on to RTS games, sure the PC wins if the consoles version are being played with a controller but since PS3 supports both keyboard & mouse what makes the PC version better??? Can't wait for Red Alert 3.

PS: UT3 was the first game on PS3 to utilize Keyboard and Mouse but I prefered the controller, again, not to mention the rumble support from the DUALSHOCK 3.

I chose PS3 over PC for the following reasons:

-Free online.(Not all PC games are FREE online, WoW for instance) WoW is an MMO, if the PS3 had a MMO, you'd pay.

-Blu-ray player, which is the best in the market with the latest BD-Live upgrade. Not up on BD, so I am unsure, but I am sure that a PC can easily accomadate this.

-OS support, I got LINUX installed on my PS3, thus a computer. You tried installing a PC game on it? Can't, can you? Not a PC, not even close.

-Online marketplace, PS Store. lol @ this one, you think you can't buy stuff on a PC?

-Home Second Life. :P

-DVD upscaler lol, PC's have done this forever.

-Splitscreen and VOIP support in all games. This is up to devs, not the system.

-Adventures, racing, RPG and sports games are better on consoles. Opinion.

-Cheaper. Agreed, but you can do more with a PC.

-MGS4 100% agree with this.

AgentH

[QUOTE="r_gam3"]Pc is inferior in every way except graphics and fps/rts controls.mudman91878

Congratulations, you fail.

Consolites ALWAYS get hammered in these discussions because virtually all of them have next to no experience with PC gaming whereas PC gamers usually have a broad knowledge of consoles and their games because we play both. You just can't argue about something that you know nothing about.

no you fail. PC is good for two things in regards to gaming. Better RTS/fps controls and graphics. AND THATS IT. Consoles are superior in every other respect. They are cheaper, way more value for money, easily accessible and lots more.

[QUOTE="mudman91878"]

[QUOTE="r_gam3"]Pc is inferior in every way except graphics and fps/rts controls.r_gam3

Congratulations, you fail.

Consolites ALWAYS get hammered in these discussions because virtually all of them have next to no experience with PC gaming whereas PC gamers usually have a broad knowledge of consoles and their games because we play both. You just can't argue about something that you know nothing about.

no you fail. PC is good for two things in regards to gaming. Better RTS/fps controls and graphics. AND THATS IT. Consoles are superior in every other respect. They are cheaper, way more value for money, easily accessible and lots more.

No, hes kinda right, most console fanboys have no experience with PC's, but in the end, this is all about preference, and your opinion is not fact, PC's can do more than consoles, period, they have more power and have the potential for better controls accross ALL genre's.

I'm pretty sure PC gaming isn't cheaper than console gaming. And the PC will never offer the overall better experience to me since I like console controllers much more for their comfort, and the PC doesn't offer many games from genres I really like (or, in certain cases, not as many of those types of games as consoles do).-The-G-Man-

Uh, I can use a PS2 and 360 controller on my PC. The rest of your post is you preference and I respect that.

I'm pretty sure PC gaming isn't cheaper than console gaming. And the PC will never offer the overall better experience to me since I like console controllers much more for their comfort, and the PC doesn't offer many games from genres I really like (or, in certain cases, not as many of those types of games as consoles do).-The-G-Man-

Uh, I can use a PS2 and 360 controller on my PC. The rest of your post is your preference and I respect that.

No, hes kinda right, most console fanboys have no experience with PC's, but in the end, this is all about preference, and your opinion is not fact, PC's can do more than consoles, period, they have more power and have the potential for better controls accross ALL genre's.

Nagidar

The keyboard and mouse is NOT the best controller for all genres. The console controller trumps it in terms of platformers, action games, and fighters.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"]

No, hes kinda right, most console fanboys have no experience with PC's, but in the end, this is all about preference, and your opinion is not fact, PC's can do more than consoles, period, they have more power and have the potential for better controls accross ALL genre's.

-The-G-Man-

The keyboard and mouse is NOT the best controller for all genres. The console controller trumps it in terms of platformers, action games, and fighters.

Is that a joke? You can use controllers on a PC, have you even used a PC for gaming before?

[QUOTE="Nagidar"]

No, hes kinda right, most console fanboys have no experience with PC's, but in the end, this is all about preference, and your opinion is not fact, PC's can do more than consoles, period, they have more power and have the potential for better controls accross ALL genre's.

-The-G-Man-

The keyboard and mouse is NOT the best controller for all genres. The console controller trumps it in terms of platformers, action games, and fighters.

Is that a joke? You can use controllers on a PC, have you even used a PC for gaming before? Oh and lets not even get into key mapping, consoles cannot do this.

Is that a joke? You can use controllers on a PC, have you even used a PC for gaming before? Oh and lets not even get into key mapping, consoles cannot do this.

Nagidar

Let's get this over with first off. Are you trying to tell me the keyboard and mouse are better for all genres or that the PC in general has the best controls for all genres (including other controllers)?

[QUOTE="Nagidar"]

Is that a joke? You can use controllers on a PC, have you even used a PC for gaming before? Oh and lets not even get into key mapping, consoles cannot do this.

-The-G-Man-

Let's get this over with first off. Are you trying to tell me the keyboard and mouse are better for all genres or that the PC in general has the best controls for all genres (including other controllers)?

Not only does a PC have KB/M and use controllers, you can map keys to whatever button you want, so yes, PC's have potential for better control schemes because you can do more and customize it to the way you want. Any other questions?

[QUOTE="Nagidar"]

Is that a joke? You can use controllers on a PC, have you even used a PC for gaming before? Oh and lets not even get into key mapping, consoles cannot do this.

-The-G-Man-

Let's get this over with first off. Are you trying to tell me the keyboard and mouse are better for all genres or that the PC in general has the best controls for all genres (including other controllers)?

Not only does a PC have KB/M and use controllers, you can map keys to whatever button you want, so yes, PC's have potential for better control schemes because you can do more and customize it to the way you want. Any other questions?

EDIT: Back to my question, have you ever used a PC for gaming? You seem to have no clue about it yet you sit here and try to talk about it.

Not only does a PC have KB/M and use controllers, you can map keys to whatever button you want, so yes, PC's have potential for better control schemes because you can do more and customize it to the way you want. Any other questions?

EDIT: Back to my question, have you ever used a PC for gaming? You seem to have no clue about it yet you sit here and try to talk about it.

Nagidar

The rest is gonna come down to preference then. To me, no amount of key mapping is gonna make the keyboard and mouse superior to the console controller for a fighting game.

And yes.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"]

Not only does a PC have KB/M and use controllers, you can map keys to whatever button you want, so yes, PC's have potential for better control schemes because you can do more and customize it to the way you want. Any other questions?

EDIT: Back to my question, have you ever used a PC for gaming? You seem to have no clue about it yet you sit here and try to talk about it.

-The-G-Man-

The rest is gonna come down to preference then. To me, no amount of key mapping is gonna make the keyboard and mouse superior to the console controller for a fighting game.

And yes.

Again, you can use console controllers on a PC, you keep thinking KB/M is the only means of controls....

Again, you can use console controllers on a PC, you keep thinking KB/M is the only means of controls....

Nagidar

Uh...no. I'm making a statement that keyboard and mouse is not the best form of control for all games. And you bring up something unrelated.

[QUOTE="r_gam3"][QUOTE="mudman91878"]

[QUOTE="r_gam3"]Pc is inferior in every way except graphics and fps/rts controls.Nagidar

Congratulations, you fail.

Consolites ALWAYS get hammered in these discussions because virtually all of them have next to no experience with PC gaming whereas PC gamers usually have a broad knowledge of consoles and their games because we play both. You just can't argue about something that you know nothing about.

no you fail. PC is good for two things in regards to gaming. Better RTS/fps controls and graphics. AND THATS IT. Consoles are superior in every other respect. They are cheaper, way more value for money, easily accessible and lots more.

No, hes kinda right, most console fanboys have no experience with PC's, but in the end, this is all about preference, and your opinion is not fact, PC's can do more than consoles, period, they have more power and have the potential for better controls accross ALL genre's.

If by power you mean processing power then you are wrong. The CELL processor beats any Home PC processors out there, alone, the CELL processor can generate awesome looking graphics without using the PS3's GPU and that is not possible on current CPUs. You have no idea what the CELL processor could do. Plus, the XDR and GDR rams used in the PS3 are x3 faster than DDR2 which make 512 MB of RAMS enough for the PS3.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"]

Again, you can use console controllers on a PC, you keep thinking KB/M is the only means of controls....

-The-G-Man-

Uh...no. I'm making a statement that keyboard and mouse is not the best form of control for all games. And you bring up something unrelated.

Oh wow...my main post even says you can use controllers on a PC, my point was, PC's have more potential for controls because you can use KB/M, controllers and key mapping. Are you seriously having trouble with this? Or are you just skipping the main point?

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="r_gam3"][QUOTE="mudman91878"]

[QUOTE="r_gam3"]Pc is inferior in every way except graphics and fps/rts controls.AgentH

Congratulations, you fail.

Consolites ALWAYS get hammered in these discussions because virtually all of them have next to no experience with PC gaming whereas PC gamers usually have a broad knowledge of consoles and their games because we play both. You just can't argue about something that you know nothing about.

no you fail. PC is good for two things in regards to gaming. Better RTS/fps controls and graphics. AND THATS IT. Consoles are superior in every other respect. They are cheaper, way more value for money, easily accessible and lots more.

No, hes kinda right, most console fanboys have no experience with PC's, but in the end, this is all about preference, and your opinion is not fact, PC's can do more than consoles, period, they have more power and have the potential for better controls accross ALL genre's.

If by power you mean processing power then you are wrong. The CELL processor beats any Home PC processors out there, alone, the CELL processor can generate awesome looking graphics without using the PS3's GPU and that is not possible on current CPUs. You have no idea what the CELL processor could do. Plus, the XDR and GDR rams used in the PS3 are x3 faster than DDR2 which make 512 MB of RAMS enough for the PS3.

Uh...no, the Cell has more FLOP power but lacks general purpose processing by a lARGE margin compared to desktops.

[QUOTE="Nagidar"][QUOTE="r_gam3"][QUOTE="mudman91878"]

[QUOTE="r_gam3"]Pc is inferior in every way except graphics and fps/rts controls.AgentH

Congratulations, you fail.

Consolites ALWAYS get hammered in these discussions because virtually all of them have next to no experience with PC gaming whereas PC gamers usually have a broad knowledge of consoles and their games because we play both. You just can't argue about something that you know nothing about.

no you fail. PC is good for two things in regards to gaming. Better RTS/fps controls and graphics. AND THATS IT. Consoles are superior in every other respect. They are cheaper, way more value for money, easily accessible and lots more.

No, hes kinda right, most console fanboys have no experience with PC's, but in the end, this is all about preference, and your opinion is not fact, PC's can do more than consoles, period, they have more power and have the potential for better controls accross ALL genre's.

If by power you mean processing power then you are wrong. The CELL processor beats any Home PC processors out there, alone, the CELL processor can generate awesome looking graphics without using the PS3's GPU and that is not possible on current CPUs. You have no idea what the CELL processor could do. Plus, the XDR and GDR rams used in the PS3 are x3 faster than DDR2 which make 512 MB of RAMS enough for the PS3.

Uh...no, the Cell has more FLOP power but lacks general purpose processing by a LARGE margin compared to desktops. The Cell could not render 3D images as well as SONY hoped, which is why they threw a GPU in the PS3.

RAM speed and RAM amount are completely different, learn what you are talking about before typing garbage like that.

GDDR RAM (Double Data Rate) are no faster in the PS3 than in a desktop, its dependent on what the rated speed is, BOTH the 360 and PS3's GPU has 700Mhz DDR, which puts both at 1.4Ghz, the PS3's system RAM is XDR and runs at 3.2Ghz.

A $1000 pc can run crysis at 1680x1050 high settings. A pc can do wayyyy much more than a console(you get to have a pc to write in this forum ). When saying that pc gaming costs more than console is probably the most stupic argument. You cant compare consoles and pcs's since pc's are used for a lot of things and they are a necessarity.You wanna compare something compare a good vga that will allow you to play games for 3,4 years like geforce 8800gt with a console. A near top vga like 8800gt or 3870h cost around $200 while consoles cost 300-500 plus pc games are cheaper to buy. so you see pc gaming is a lot cheaper. plus a game in pc can have much more life from the console game because it gets alot of mods maps e.t.c How many mods are there for the console part of half life 2 or unreal tournament 2004(i install more than 20 mods for each game and more than 100 maps for unreal and is still play them 4 years after i bought them) Plus i play ps1 nintendo64 dreamcast and even few ps2 games in my pc via emulators. And finally i have mame with over a 1000 arcade games roms installed. And i hate playing driving games with keyboard so i bought a gamepad(some console gamers say they cant play with Kb+M in pc so buy a gamepad). And finally my pc is connected in both my 22'' monitor and to my 42''(so many consolites have 42'' lcd) lcd and when i wanna play games in my couch i take my wireless gamepad and play them in my couchadamosmaki

hmm we're talking in gaming man, not business. And hell NO it's not the most stupic argument because upgrading your PC for a game like Crysis costs more than 600+$ plz cut it out. And consoles gets MAPs, MODS and downloadable contents too, WTF? PC games are 10$ cheaper wow HUGE difference. We got Blu-ray, you're still using the old GENERATION DVDs. Sorry pal. PS3 at least is way more advanced than most PCs out there, and don't bring Crysis, because seriously nothing is good in this game beside the graphics, COD4 easily beats it. Oh and 3, 4 years for every new GPU? PS2 lasted 7 years and it keeps selling.

[QUOTE="adamosmaki"]
A $1000 pc can run crysis at 1680x1050 high settings. A pc can do wayyyy much more than a console(you get to have a pc to write in this forum ). When saying that pc gaming costs more than console is probably the most stupic argument. You cant compare consoles and pcs's since pc's are used for a lot of things and they are a necessarity.You wanna compare something compare a good vga that will allow you to play games for 3,4 years like geforce 8800gt with a console. A near top vga like 8800gt or 3870h cost around $200 while consoles cost 300-500 plus pc games are cheaper to buy. so you see pc gaming is a lot cheaper. plus a game in pc can have much more life from the console game because it gets alot of mods maps e.t.c How many mods are there for the console part of half life 2 or unreal tournament 2004(i install more than 20 mods for each game and more than 100 maps for unreal and is still play them 4 years after i bought them) Plus i play ps1 nintendo64 dreamcast and even few ps2 games in my pc via emulators. And finally i have mame with over a 1000 arcade games roms installed. And i hate playing driving games with keyboard so i bought a gamepad(some console gamers say they cant play with Kb+M in pc so buy a gamepad). And finally my pc is connected in both my 22'' monitor and to my 42''(so many consolites have 42'' lcd) lcd and when i wanna play games in my couch i take my wireless gamepad and play them in my couchAgentH

hmm we're talking in gaming man, not business. And hell NO it's not the most stupic argument because upgrading your PC for a game like Crysis costs more than 600+$ plz cut it out. And consoles gets MAPs, MODS and downloadable contents too, WTF? PC games are 10$ cheaper wow HUGE difference. We got Blu-ray, you're still using the old GENERATION DVDs. Sorry pal. PS3 at least is way more advanced than most PCs out there, and don't bring Crysis, because seriously nothing is good in this game beside the graphics, COD4 easily beats it. Oh and 3, 4 years for every new GPU? PS2 lasted 7 years and it keeps selling.

Wow, you have no clue what you're talking about.

1. Consoles get nowhere near the extra content PC's get. You can't argue this.

2. You think PC's don't have BluRay? You fail.

3. Have you even played Crysis? I would assume no since you're talking out of you butt.

4. Comparing a GPU to the PS2? How stupid is that? Can you even think of a PS2 game that looks as good as a current PC game? Thought so.

EDIT: On number 4 I should have said "Can you even think of a PS2 game that looks as good as a current PC game on a technical level?" Because I understand people have different tastes when it comes to visual preference.

[QUOTE="AgentH"]

[QUOTE="adamosmaki"]
A $1000 pc can run crysis at 1680x1050 high settings. A pc can do wayyyy much more than a console(you get to have a pc to write in this forum ). When saying that pc gaming costs more than console is probably the most stupic argument. You cant compare consoles and pcs's since pc's are used for a lot of things and they are a necessarity.You wanna compare something compare a good vga that will allow you to play games for 3,4 years like geforce 8800gt with a console. A near top vga like 8800gt or 3870h cost around $200 while consoles cost 300-500 plus pc games are cheaper to buy. so you see pc gaming is a lot cheaper. plus a game in pc can have much more life from the console game because it gets alot of mods maps e.t.c How many mods are there for the console part of half life 2 or unreal tournament 2004(i install more than 20 mods for each game and more than 100 maps for unreal and is still play them 4 years after i bought them) Plus i play ps1 nintendo64 dreamcast and even few ps2 games in my pc via emulators. And finally i have mame with over a 1000 arcade games roms installed. And i hate playing driving games with keyboard so i bought a gamepad(some console gamers say they cant play with Kb+M in pc so buy a gamepad). And finally my pc is connected in both my 22'' monitor and to my 42''(so many consolites have 42'' lcd) lcd and when i wanna play games in my couch i take my wireless gamepad and play them in my couchNagidar

hmm we're talking in gaming man, not business. And hell NO it's not the most stupic argument because upgrading your PC for a game like Crysis costs more than 600+$ plz cut it out. And consoles gets MAPs, MODS and downloadable contents too, WTF? PC games are 10$ cheaper wow HUGE difference. We got Blu-ray, you're still using the old GENERATION DVDs. Sorry pal. PS3 at least is way more advanced than most PCs out there, and don't bring Crysis, because seriously nothing is good in this game beside the graphics, COD4 easily beats it. Oh and 3, 4 years for every new GPU? PS2 lasted 7 years and it keeps selling.

Wow, you have no clue what you're talking about.

1. Consoles get nowhere near the extra content PC's get. You can't argue this.

As far as gaming goes, WHAT CONTENT you're talking about??????

2. You think PC's don't have BluRay? You fail.

hmm ok....PS3 is still the cheapest Blu-ray player and the most advanced player in the market after the latest BD-Live upgrade.

3. Have you even played Crysis? I would assume no since you're talking out of you butt.

I did play Crysis. COD4 still beats it.

4. Comparing a GPU to the PS2? How stupid is that? Can you even think of a PS2 game that looks as good as a current PC game? Thought so.

hmm. He was trying to say that consoles DON'T LAST as much as PC do because of the GPU, I threw in PS2 as an example, where's the wrong. I never said PS2 graphically is better then current PCs.