PC vs X360

[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

360 wins.

roflcopter317

No one with a gaming PC will ever encounter that screen in their life. I know I certainly haven't. 8) Well ONCE.. during Clear Sky. That game was ****ing evil.

I encountered that serveral times. My pc kept restarting too lol.

Then you dont have a gaming pc

Better shooters? HAHAHAHA! Surely, you do jest? Nice try, however, please try harder.GswSir

Don't make me post it again.

From 2005 to 2010 AAA shooters.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=xbox360&cat=55&year=0&numrev=3&sort=0&letter=&search=

360= Halo: 3, Halo: Reach (comming soon), Gears 2, Gears 3 (upcomming).

PC= Crysis.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=pc&cat=55&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="WhenCicadasCry"]

No one with a gaming PC will ever encounter that screen in their life. I know I certainly haven't. 8) Well ONCE.. during Clear Sky. That game was ****ing evil.

edinsftw

I encountered that serveral times. My pc kept restarting too lol.

Then you dont have a gaming pc

I have a 9800gt, Q8200, 4gb ram. I am pretty sure that is a gaming pc. It costs over $1000.

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Better shooters? HAHAHAHA! Surely, you do jest? Nice try, however, please try harder.roflcopter317

Don't make me post it again.

From 2005 to 2010 AAA shooters.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=xbox360&cat=55&year=0&numrev=3&sort=0&letter=&search=

360= Halo: 3, Halo: Reach (comming soon), Gears 2, Gears 3 (upcomming).

PC= Crysis.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=pc&cat=55&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

I am sorry, none of those shooters were anything beyond rehashes. Besides which, how can you even analyze games not yet released?

Well, Crysis had cool graphics, however I much preferred BF2, Call of Duty 4, Red Orchestra, etc.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Better shooters? HAHAHAHA! Surely, you do jest? Nice try, however, please try harder.GswSir

Don't make me post it again.

From 2005 to 2010 AAA shooters.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=xbox360&cat=55&year=0&numrev=3&sort=0&letter=&search=

360= Halo: 3, Halo: Reach (comming soon), Gears 2, Gears 3 (upcomming).

PC= Crysis.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=pc&cat=55&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

I am sorry, none of those shooters were anything beyond rehashes.

Well, Crysis had cool graphics, however I much preferred BF2, Call of Duty 4, Red Orchestra, etc.

Well according to the scores it says otherwise. Also all you have to say about crysis is it's graphics, that's because that is the best thing about it. It is pretty easy to tell what a game is going to score. You just look at the previous title and the next game will surely be around the same score, if not more.

360 wins.

roflcopter317

Yup, the BSOD is native to Windows. Consoles don't receive messages like this as when hardware fails, it's unlikely the console will work, or will just freeze constantly.

I've only ever received the BSOD for hardware problems, and software clashes that cause this magnitude of an error are fairly rare -- unless you're using obscure software.

Score is but one aspect, so I am inclined to disagree. Besides which, what scores high on one console, may be given a completely different score on another, thus comparing them is rather moot.GswSir

All games are rated equaly on each platform.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?search=bad+company+2&numrev=3&site=

You didnt prove anything, the only you proved is that you can accept any other facts besides the one you providewhichis incorrect.

well for one... MMOs are subscription based services... its sort of a different league... but i guess include em if you want. I dont think most people consider them the same as regular games. Expansions arent games... they are expansions. Might as well include DLC then.

its pretty well understood that games that sell for less than retail games are judged to different standards.... many of the reviews will talk of "value" and such in them.

markinthedark

Why are you even continuing to debate this? Expansions are games and MMO's are games. Every exclusive in the GS spreadsheet is exclusive to the platform. No if's, and's or but's about it.

Also, you still didn't provide a link to that claim, so trying to explain it to me proves nothing... Unfortunately for you.

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Score is but one aspect, so I am inclined to disagree. Besides which, what scores high on one console, may be given a completely different score on another, thus comparing them is rather moot.roflcopter317

All games are rated equaly on each platform.

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Score is but one aspect, so I am inclined to disagree. Besides which, what scores high on one console, may be given a completely different score on another, thus comparing them is rather moot.roflcopter317

Thats why GAMERANKINGS is for. It averages all the scores from every website.

Clearly, however I mean it thus: Lets say game A gets a 9.0 in general for the 360, how do you compare that to game B which gets an 8.9 on the PC on average if both are exclusive to each system?

There are too many factors invovled to simply say the 360 game is better because it recieved a higher score.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=pc&cat=0&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

PC=6 games not on 360 over the score of 9 between 2005 to 2010.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=xbox360&cat=0&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

360=9 games not on pc over the score of 9 between 2005 to 2010.

360 wins.

And in 4 days time that 360 will = 10 games with the addition of halo reach.

So this is opinion?

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=pc&cat=0&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

PC=6 games not on 360 over the score of 9 between 2005 to 2010.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=xbox360&cat=0&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

360=9 games not on pc over the score of 9 between 2005 to 2010.

360 wins.

And in 4 days time that 360 will = 10 games with the addition of halo reach.

So this is opinion?

roflcopter317

For a better analysis, you may want to reduce the number of reviews you have it set to. Civ IV was cut off because you have it at 20, and it received 17 reviews.

Set it to 1 or to 5.

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Score is but one aspect, so I am inclined to disagree. Besides which, what scores high on one console, may be given a completely different score on another, thus comparing them is rather moot.roflcopter317

All games are rated equaly on each platform.

[QUOTE="Lucianu"]

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

Oh the hypocisy XD gotta love it. And I also have provided facts.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=pc&cat=0&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

PC=6 games not on 360 over the score of 9 between 2005 to 2010.

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=xbox360&cat=0&year=0&numrev=0&sort=0&letter=&search=

360=9 games not on pc over the score of 9 between 2005 to 2010.

360 wins.

And in 4 days time that 360 will = 10 games with the addition of halo reach.

You mad?

roflcopter317

Gotta love the stupidity. So you only play games above 9? Well, hate to break it for you, but PC standards are higher(proven by countless nr. of official people). Meaning every game that gets a 8 on the PC, would have gotten a 9.5 on your console, fanboy. ALSO, its a matter of subjectivity. So that's that.

Like i said, Stalker > Halo

Counterstrike, TF2, Crysis, Starcraft 2 > Your worthless life. Sorry, you lost.. again.

I guess you do get excited for failing continuously. C'mon, that's all?

I did compare AA games but I couldn't be bothered counting the A games atm. Every game on pc DOESN'T get a lower score, they are all the same on each platform, you can look at any game and you will see this. The exeption here is GTA4, because that game was so poorly optimised that they brought the score down.

And TF2 is a multiplatform game. I need to stop feeding these trolls....

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Score is but one aspect, so I am inclined to disagree. Besides which, what scores high on one console, may be given a completely different score on another, thus comparing them is rather moot.GswSir

Thats why GAMERANKINGS is for. It averages all the scores from every website.

They are still mostly the same score, and you are thinking of MULTIPLATFORM games. I made a list of AAA exclusives on each one and the 360 came on top it is that simple.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Score is but one aspect, so I am inclined to disagree. Besides which, what scores high on one console, may be given a completely different score on another, thus comparing them is rather moot.04dcarraher

All games are rated equaly on each platform.

[QUOTE="GswSir"][QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

Thats why GAMERANKINGS is for. It averages all the scores from every website.

roflcopter317

They are still mostly the same score, and you are thinking of MULTIPLATFORM games. I made a list of AAA exclusives on each one and the 360 came on top it is that simple.

"Mostly" is hardly acceptable as serious evidence.

For your data to be useful we would need to establish that there is no deviance in scores between different systems, exclusive or not.

You can't compare exclusives on differnt platfrorms by score.Sigh.....someone link him Kevin V's post please

[QUOTE="lordreaven"][QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

I was talking about that other game firefall.

It wouldn't be considered a full retail game.

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="GswSir"]Score is but one aspect, so I am inclined to disagree. Besides which, what scores high on one console, may be given a completely different score on another, thus comparing them is rather moot.ducati101

All games are rated equaly on each platform.

Yep ,

Pc exclusives from 2005 to nowAA-AAA = 92 AA-79 AAA-13

360 exclusives from 2005 to now AA-AAA = 22 AA-15 AAA-7

[QUOTE="roflcopter317"]

[QUOTE="lordreaven"]So.........whats your point?lordreaven

It wouldn't be considered a full retail game.

His point is, because this cost $60 a year

it's clearly superior to

because it's free. :lol:

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

well for one... MMOs are subscription based services... its sort of a different league... but i guess include em if you want. I dont think most people consider them the same as regular games. Expansions arent games... they are expansions. Might as well include DLC then.

its pretty well understood that games that sell for less than retail games are judged to different standards.... many of the reviews will talk of "value" and such in them.

lundy86_4

Why are you even continuing to debate this? Expansions are games and MMO's are games. Every exclusive in the GS spreadsheet is exclusive to the platform. No if's, and's or but's about it.

Also, you still didn't provide a link to that claim, so trying to explain it to me proves nothing... Unfortunately for you.

here from the sim city box review:

The Good

SimCity 4 and Rush Hour have aged well and are as addictive as ever

The Societies titles are good, laid-back fun

A lot of gameplay at a terrific price..

and in the body of the review..

"Yet at $39.95, it packs in dozens of hours of quality gameplay, thanks in particular to the inclusion of SimCity 4 and its Rush Hour add-on."

Gotta wonder why they keep mentioning the price if its being reviewed to the same standards as full priced games? seems like there would be no need to mention it.

And here is a quote from their review of "The Ship"

"But even while these problems are troublesome, they're minor. The Ship is one of the best and most innovative multiplayer games available right now, particularly at its cut-rate price of $20, and it is developing a considerable online fan base, so you can find a server loaded with players any time of the day or night. "

and expansions are not games, they are expansions... if they were actual games they would be be called sequels and reviewed to different standards.

for instance the review would go like this "they changed absolutely next to nothing in terms of gameplay, the graphics are not even remotely improved... all they did was add on a few extra levels and try to call it a new game"

but instead here is the review ofEuropa Universalis III: Heir to the Throne:

"The problems with Heir to the Throne are pretty minimal. The biggest problem is that the game requires EU3 and its first two expansions, which could dissuade people who don't already own the so-called complete edition. Additionally, one could interpret Heir's tiny download size as proof that it could or should have been a patch. However, Heir improves nearly every aspect of EU3 and offers more content than Napoleon's Ambition, the first expansion to EU3, so its small size belies the fact that it packs in a lot of improvements per megabyte. Heir is a much more significant upgrade than a mere patch. Whether these improvements are worth the $20 asking price is subjective, of course, but they do make EU3 significantly more enjoyable."

I personally think you are well aware that gamespot isnt reviewing these bargain games/expansion to the same standards as full retail games... so i dont know why you are purposely being difficult...

EDIT: and im sure there is plenty more evidence, but im not sifting through all the reviews.... its clear gamespot is accounting for the price in their reviews.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

well for one... MMOs are subscription based services... its sort of a different league... but i guess include em if you want. I dont think most people consider them the same as regular games. Expansions arent games... they are expansions. Might as well include DLC then.

its pretty well understood that games that sell for less than retail games are judged to different standards.... many of the reviews will talk of "value" and such in them.

markinthedark

Why are you even continuing to debate this? Expansions are games and MMO's are games. Every exclusive in the GS spreadsheet is exclusive to the platform. No if's, and's or but's about it.

Also, you still didn't provide a link to that claim, so trying to explain it to me proves nothing... Unfortunately for you.

here from the sim city box review:

The Good

SimCity 4 and Rush Hour have aged well and are as addictive as ever

The Societies titles are good, laid-back fun

A lot of gameplay at a terrific price..

and in the body of the review..

"Yet at $39.95, it packs in dozens of hours of quality gameplay, thanks in particular to the inclusion of SimCity 4 and its Rush Hour add-on."

Gotta wonder why they keep mentioning the price if its being reviewed to the same standards as full priced games? seems like there would be no need to mention it.

And here is a quote from their review of "The Ship"

"But even while these problems are troublesome, they're minor. The Ship is one of the best and most innovative multiplayer games available right now, particularly at its cut-rate price of $20, and it is developing a considerable online fan base, so you can find a server loaded with players any time of the day or night. "

and expansions are not games, they are expansions... if they were actual games they would be be called sequels and reviewed to different standards.

for instance the review would go like this "they changed absolutely next to nothing in terms of gameplay, the graphics are not even remotely improved... all they did was add on a few extra levels and try to call it a new game"

but instead here is the review ofEuropa Universalis III: Heir to the Throne:

"The problems with Heir to the Throne are pretty minimal. The biggest problem is that the game requires EU3 and its first two expansions, which could dissuade people who don't already own the so-called complete edition. Additionally, one could interpret Heir's tiny download size as proof that it could or should have been a patch. However, Heir improves nearly every aspect of EU3 and offers more content than Napoleon's Ambition, the first expansion to EU3, so its small size belies the fact that it packs in a lot of improvements per megabyte. Heir is a much more significant upgrade than a mere patch. Whether these improvements are worth the $20 asking price is subjective, of course, but they do make EU3 significantly more enjoyable."

I personally think you are well aware that gamespot isnt reviewing these bargain games/expansion to the same standards as full retail games... so i dont know why you are purposely being difficult...

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Why are you even continuing to debate this? Expansions are games and MMO's are games. Every exclusive in the GS spreadsheet is exclusive to the platform. No if's, and's or but's about it.

Also, you still didn't provide a link to that claim, so trying to explain it to me proves nothing... Unfortunately for you.

ducati101

here from the sim city box review:

The Good

SimCity 4 and Rush Hour have aged well and are as addictive as ever

The Societies titles are good, laid-back fun

A lot of gameplay at a terrific price..

and in the body of the review..

"Yet at $39.95, it packs in dozens of hours of quality gameplay, thanks in particular to the inclusion of SimCity 4 and its Rush Hour add-on."

Gotta wonder why they keep mentioning the price if its being reviewed to the same standards as full priced games? seems like there would be no need to mention it.

And here is a quote from their review of "The Ship"

"But even while these problems are troublesome, they're minor. The Ship is one of the best and most innovative multiplayer games available right now, particularly at its cut-rate price of $20, and it is developing a considerable online fan base, so you can find a server loaded with players any time of the day or night. "

and expansions are not games, they are expansions... if they were actual games they would be be called sequels and reviewed to different standards.

for instance the review would go like this "they changed absolutely next to nothing in terms of gameplay, the graphics are not even remotely improved... all they did was add on a few extra levels and try to call it a new game"

but instead here is the review ofEuropa Universalis III: Heir to the Throne:

"The problems with Heir to the Throne are pretty minimal. The biggest problem is that the game requires EU3 and its first two expansions, which could dissuade people who don't already own the so-called complete edition. Additionally, one could interpret Heir's tiny download size as proof that it could or should have been a patch. However, Heir improves nearly every aspect of EU3 and offers more content than Napoleon's Ambition, the first expansion to EU3, so its small size belies the fact that it packs in a lot of improvements per megabyte. Heir is a much more significant upgrade than a mere patch. Whether these improvements are worth the $20 asking price is subjective, of course, but they do make EU3 significantly more enjoyable."

I personally think you are well aware that gamespot isnt reviewing these bargain games/expansion to the same standards as full retail games... so i dont know why you are purposely being difficult...

you couldnt have backed me up by agreeing with me while lundy is insisting for links to prove that gamespot doesnt review bargain titles and expansions the same as full priced games? made me read through pointless reviews huh...

and yes those are a feather in the cap of PC gamers, but they arent reviewed to the same standards so there is no good way to compare them... and Halo ODST was reviewed as a full priced retail title... whether or not the reviewer was out of his gourd, i dunno. But in terms of comparing scores, it was reviewed by gamespot as a full priced game.

and i think expansions are just as much like DLC, as expansions are like full retail games.... which is not even closely related... but tell that to lundy, not me.

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]@roflcopter317, you do realize that forge isnt even in the same class as something like the Source SDK, frankly to say that forge is on equal grounds with a PC game's mod tools is insulting to the SDKs. Forge isnt even a fully fledged map editor, it is more akin to a crippled garrys mod.roflcopter317

I know that, but the new forge mode is alot closer.

here from the sim city box review:

The Good

SimCity 4 and Rush Hour have aged well and are as addictive as ever

The Societies titles are good, laid-back fun

A lot of gameplay at a terrific price..

and in the body of the review..

"Yet at $39.95, it packs in dozens of hours of quality gameplay, thanks in particular to the inclusion of SimCity 4 and its Rush Hour add-on."

Gotta wonder why they keep mentioning the price if its being reviewed to the same standards as full priced games? seems like there would be no need to mention it.

And here is a quote from their review of "The Ship"

"But even while these problems are troublesome, they're minor. The Ship is one of the best and most innovative multiplayer games available right now, particularly at its cut-rate price of $20, and it is developing a considerable online fan base, so you can find a server loaded with players any time of the day or night. "

and expansions are not games, they are expansions... if they were actual games they would be be called sequels and reviewed to different standards.

for instance the review would go like this "they changed absolutely next to nothing in terms of gameplay, the graphics are not even remotely improved... all they did was add on a few extra levels and try to call it a new game"

but instead here is the review ofEuropa Universalis III: Heir to the Throne:

"The problems with Heir to the Throne are pretty minimal. The biggest problem is that the game requires EU3 and its first two expansions, which could dissuade people who don't already own the so-called complete edition. Additionally, one could interpret Heir's tiny download size as proof that it could or should have been a patch. However, Heir improves nearly every aspect of EU3 and offers more content than Napoleon's Ambition, the first expansion to EU3, so its small size belies the fact that it packs in a lot of improvements per megabyte. Heir is a much more significant upgrade than a mere patch. Whether these improvements are worth the $20 asking price is subjective, of course, but they do make EU3 significantly more enjoyable."

I personally think you are well aware that gamespot isnt reviewing these bargain games/expansion to the same standards as full retail games... so i dont know why you are purposely being difficult...

EDIT: and im sure there is plenty more evidence, but im not sifting through all the reviews.... its clear gamespot is accounting for the price in their reviews.

markinthedark

Much better, and I appreciate the sifting. It's a lot of reading between the lines, but the continual reference to price may not be due to reviewing to a lower standard, it may just be to draw attention to what you get for the price.

As for the expansions. You're right, they're expansions, but nowadays they offer as much as fully fledged games in terms of content. Why not count them? You saying what a reviewer would say, also holds no water, as reviews are simply opinions. Subjective views of a product.

Unfortunately reading between the lines doesn't constitute anything solid as it's open to other viewpoints. As for being difficult, how am I? I simply asked for a link you wouldn't provide.

360 wins.

roflcopter317

you have just proven M$ are bunch of idiots who don't even know how to make software (windows) and hardware (360) RROD,e74 FTW

Thank you for proving M$ sucks :lol:

You are not proving anything you know that. I changed it to gameraking scores and you are still complaining. The pc USED to have amazing shooters though back 10 years ago.

roflcopter317

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

This is'nt really a competetion.

markinthedark

well of course not. the poll is essentially xbox fanboys vs wii, ps3 and pc fanboys combined.

PC is the better of the two.

Easiest poll ever.

PC easily.

PC easily.

UnknownElement4

IF it were easy then we wouldnt have polls and debates daily?

Easily 360. For the average person PC gaming is just awkward. I don't care if PC has the best graphics in the world or the most mods because it is no where near as accesible as any console.