Poll: Console gamers why do you prefer console gaming over PC gaming?

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

what you are trying to do is to hide the truth. I will say it again this statement "a pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles" is 100% true.

Since you mentioned crysis2 many times in your posts, here are some results with the 8800(1680x1050, avg 43fps, with the same low settings like consoles), ps3(1024x720, avg 25-30fps)and 360(1152x720, avg 25-30fps) pretty bad for consoles if you ask me.

MK-Professor

I have no problem accepting that someone who paid 2-3 times more for a pc in 06 can run games better than someone who bought a console at the same time. "A pc from 2006 plays games better than consoles." Is there a pc from 2006 that plays games better than consoles? Yes. Therefore the statement is true. We're in complete agreement about that one, and have been the whole time.

"Even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles." THAT is what you said was not true. Because it isn't. The subject, "you" is referring to anyone who "has a pc from 2006." In order for the statement to be true, the subject (anyone who has a pc from 2006) has to "know that it plays any game better than consoles." Since not all pcs from 2006 can play any game better than consoles, the statement is false. Obviously not everyone with a pc from 2006 can't know that it plays any game better than consoles if every pc from 2006 actually can. Now. Shall we go around the circle one more time?

this statement

"A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles"

and this statement

"even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

have basically the same meaning, that a pc (not every pc) will play any game better than consoles

also i never said "anyone who has a pc from 2006"

Anyway, it is quite obvious that you are trying to cover the truth with all this arguments about statements, grammar etc, because you don't like that an ancient pc can play games better than consoles.

I like PS3 gaming and other ocnsole gameing more because I don't like M/K, don't like sitting infront of a moniter that close for too long, can't do local multiplayer, can't play from my couch, PC doesn't have any exclusives that I know about or care for, don't want to pay a bunch of money for upgrades every week, and I don't think it's worth the money to upgrade games for just a slightly better performance.

The only things I like about PC gamingare mods and Steam, and that's about it.

ShadowMoses900

You can do PC gaming from a couch and you can connect a PC to a TV, although it may be more cumbersome compared to playing a console from a couch for a few reasons. Just stop right there, you don't need to upgrade a PC every week for PC gaming. Even a 8800 GTX from 2007 should perform better than current consoles GPU and play the multiplatform games with higher settings and same frame rate or same settings with a highe frame rate.My GTX 580 that I bought in January is still doing fine in most games I playat max settings and 1080p, and the one game I can't use max settings is because it's mostly a CPU bound game. I don't see a need to upgrade to a GTX 590 or go SLI. Just don't buy low end hardware and you won't need to upgrade as often. I actually console game much more than I PC game these days and I bought the new Batman game for the Xbox 360 even though I know I will lose out in graphics quality by not getting the PC version, but I didn't want ot wait for the PC version and I'm not sure what it will use for DRM.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I like PS3 gaming and other ocnsole gameing more because I don't like M/K, don't like sitting infront of a moniter that close for too long, can't do local multiplayer, can't play from my couch, PC doesn't have any exclusives that I know about or care for, don't want to pay a bunch of money for upgrades every week, and I don't think it's worth the money to upgrade games for just a slightly better performance.

The only things I like about PC gamingare mods and Steam, and that's about it.

DJP3000

You can do PC gaming from a couch and you can connect a PC to a TV, although it may be more cumbersome compared to playing a console from a couch for a few reasons. Just stop right there, you don't need to upgrade a PC every week for PC gaming. Even a 8800 GTX from 2007 should perform better than current consoles GPU and play the multiplatform games with higher settings and same frame rate or same settings with a highe frame rate.My GTX 580 that I bought in January is still doing fine in most games I playat max settings and 1080p, and the one game I can't use max settings is because it's mostly a CPU bound game. I don't see a need to upgrade to a GTX 590 or go SLI. Just don't buy low end hardware and you won't need to upgrade as often. I actually console game much more than I PC game these days and I bought the new Batman game for the Xbox 360 even though I know I will lose out in graphics quality by not getting the PC version, but I didn't want ot wait for the PC version and I'm not sure what it will use for DRM.

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]Yep. I'll say again I never argued with that statement. "A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles" =/= "even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles." You keep repeating the first one, and trying to say I'm arguing with it. The statement you said initially, that I refuted is the second one. As I've explained over and over, those two statements do not have the same meaning.

I have no problem accepting that someone who paid 2-3 times more for a pc in 06 can run games better than someone who bought a console at the same time. "A pc from 2006 plays games better than consoles." Is there a pc from 2006 that plays games better than consoles? Yes. Therefore the statement is true. We're in complete agreement about that one, and have been the whole time.

"Even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles." THAT is what you said was not true. Because it isn't. The subject, "you" is referring to anyone who "has a pc from 2006." In order for the statement to be true, the subject (anyone who has a pc from 2006) has to "know that it plays any game better than consoles." Since not all pcs from 2006 can play any game better than consoles, the statement is false. Obviously not everyone with a pc from 2006 can't know that it plays any game better than consoles if every pc from 2006 actually can. Now. Shall we go around the circle one more time?

locopatho

this statement

"A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles"

and this statement

"even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

have basically the same meaning, that a pc (not every pc) will play any game better than consoles

also i never said "anyone who has a pc from 2006"

Anyway, it is quite obvious that you are trying to cover the truth with all this arguments about statements, grammar etc, because you don't like that an ancient pc can play games better than consoles.

compared to the new ones yes it is ancient.

[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

this statement

"A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles"

and this statement

"even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

have basically the same meaning, that a pc (not every pc) will play any game better than consoles

also i never said "anyone who has a pc from 2006"

Anyway, it is quite obvious that you are trying to cover the truth with all this arguments about statements, grammar etc, because you don't like that an ancient pc can play games better than consoles.

MK-Professor

compared to the new ones yes it is ancient.

I prefer games on consoles. Games like Final Fantasy, Kingodm Hearts, Jak and Daxter, etc, are not on PC.

Show me a PC (the complete tower + keyboard and mouse, leave out the screen) that could be bought in 2008 for 599EUR and can play MW3 as good as a PS360. Hell i heard time and time again that a P4 with a 7600 could match a PS3. I had a laptop bought 1 year after the PS3 for 800EUR core2duo t5250 with a ati3470, 256 dedicated ram and 3gb system ram annnnd it struggles like hell to play Black Ops, even with everything on low the framerate is 20 at best. Now i know i know, laptops, boooo worst things you can get for games. 1. I didn't got it for games, just brought it up over the p4+7600 i use to hear a lot 2. My point stands, i'd love to see a full tower+mouse&keyboard for 600EUR in 2008 running MW3 as well as the PS360 can. And thats my hole point, yes PC gaming is better when you pass some of the nonsense with drivers, but its amazingly expensive, you get a lot more for you money with consoles IMO. Like for some reason my current laptop doesnt run SA in full screen, theres a inch of black on each side of the screen and today i've spent about 20 minutes trying to mend that, if it was on my PS2 (thats dead) or my 60GB PS3 (thats dead) i would have spent those 20 minutes having a blast. By the way, i didn't fix it so i quit the game, the joys of nostalgic games.Kane04

Show me a PC (the complete tower + keyboard and mouse, leave out the screen) that could be bought in 2008 for 599EUR and can play MW3 as good as a PS360. Hell i heard time and time again that a P4 with a 7600 could match a PS3. I had a laptop bought 1 year after the PS3 for 800EUR core2duo t5250 with a ati3470, 256 dedicated ram and 3gb system ram annnnd it struggles like hell to play Black Ops, even with everything on low the framerate is 20 at best. Now i know i know, laptops, boooo worst things you can get for games. 1. I didn't got it for games, just brought it up over the p4+7600 i use to hear a lot 2. My point stands, i'd love to see a full tower+mouse&keyboard for 600EUR in 2008 running MW3 as well as the PS360 can. And thats my hole point, yes PC gaming is better when you pass some of the nonsense with drivers, but its amazingly expensive, you get a lot more for you money with consoles IMO. Like for some reason my current laptop doesnt run SA in full screen, theres a inch of black on each side of the screen and today i've spent about 20 minutes trying to mend that, if it was on my PS2 (thats dead) or my 60GB PS3 (thats dead) i would have spent those 20 minutes having a blast. By the way, i didn't fix it so i quit the game, the joys of nostalgic games.Kane04

Well first off in 2008 you could grab a Athlon X2 6000, motherboard,a psu and a 8800GT(for $125), 4gb of ddr2 a 500gb hdd, case+psu for well under 599 euro ($820) You could have built it for $600. I built a complete tower in 2007 for $750 and was same as above. a 8800GT when it was new($275). Then you need to understand hardware before you make claims. Back in 2005-2007, 99% of games were single threaded/cpu based everyone knew how to code for that, so multipleform games that were done on Pc as well as console ran on one cpu including the PS3/360. So someone having a Pentium 4, Athlon XP, Athlon 64, based cpu was faster then the consoles during that time, the consoles were also memory limited, that hurt performance and their ability to store more then 512mb of data at any time. then the gpu's in both consoles were both gimped by memory limits in amount and speed and still are.

Now moving on sorry, laptops are not really meant to game on and that laptop you bought sucks on the gpu. a 3450 is worse then the Xenos gpu in the 360, let alone its a laptop model to boot. Call of Duty 2 and 4 ran just fine on my Sempron 3300+, 1.5 gb and Geforce 7600GT and it ran at 2x the resolution then consoles version's 1024x600... You love to see a 2008 based Pc run MW3? All CoD gamesd this gen have been running the same graphics engine since the 2nd one. Any dual core cpu , 2gb of memory and a Geforce 8 will run MW3 alot better then any of the HD twins.

You do not get more with consoles then Pc, Pc is a true open based multifunction item that can do anything from web surfing to editing videos to playing games. Pc gaming is only as hard and expensive as *you* make it out to be. If you bought a 360 at launch and spent $500 along with live every year ( 6x50=$300), and paying $60 all the time on a new game. Console gaming is just as expensive as Pc gaming in the end. If you built a good Pc in 2006 or 2007 you can still play modern games above/better then consoles can do today.

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

what you are trying to do is to hide the truth. I will say it again this statement "a pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles" is 100% true.

Since you mentioned crysis2 many times in your posts, here are some results with the 8800(1680x1050, avg 43fps, with the same low settings like consoles), ps3(1024x720, avg 25-30fps)and 360(1152x720, avg 25-30fps) pretty bad for consoles if you ask me.

MK-Professor

I have no problem accepting that someone who paid 2-3 times more for a pc in 06 can run games better than someone who bought a console at the same time. "A pc from 2006 plays games better than consoles." Is there a pc from 2006 that plays games better than consoles? Yes. Therefore the statement is true. We're in complete agreement about that one, and have been the whole time.

"Even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles." THAT is what you said was not true. Because it isn't. The subject, "you" is referring to anyone who "has a pc from 2006." In order for the statement to be true, the subject (anyone who has a pc from 2006) has to "know that it plays any game better than consoles." Since not all pcs from 2006 can play any game better than consoles, the statement is false. Obviously not everyone with a pc from 2006 can't know that it plays any game better than consoles if every pc from 2006 actually can. Now. Shall we go around the circle one more time?

this statement

"A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles"

and this statement

"even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

have basically the same meaning, that a pc (not every pc) will play any game better than consoles

also i never said "anyone who has a pc from 2006"

Anyway, it is quite obvious that you are trying to cover the truth with all this arguments about statements, grammar etc, because you don't like that an ancient pc can play games better than consoles.

The second sentence "even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than pcs" doesn't actually mean the same thing. It's possible English isn't your native language, I don't know you, so I try not to judge. Instead, I'll continiue to try to explain the difference. The first part "even if you have a pc from 2006," is called a conditional, or an "if-clause." IF the condition in the clause is true, then whatever is in the main sentence body following the clause is also true (note: the sentence I just used to explain conditionals is an example of a sentence starting with a conditional). Alternatively, the main sentence can come before the conditional with the same meaning.

So the conditional in your sentence, "even if you have a pc from 2006" sets the condition to be owning a pc from 2006. As long as someone owns a pc from 2006, the condition is met. Now in the other sentence above, the lack of specificity is what allows the sentence to be true. As long as there is one pc that fulfills the criteria, "a pc plays ..." is true. In this case though, that same lack of specificity is what makes the whole sentence false, because as long as the person owns "a pc," the conditional is met. If the condition is met, then "you already know it plays any game better than consoles" should be true. But since a $300 off the rack single core with integrated graphics fulfills the conditional, yet doesn't result in "knowing that it plays any game better than consoles (or at all)," the entire sentence is false.

See? That wasn't too complicated. Grammar is pretty easy, really. Now as to the rest of your post, how is it "quite obvious that I want to cover the truth because I don't like that a (6 year old) pc can play games better than consoles" when I have repeatedly agreed with that? The problem I had with your initial statement was that it very clearly DOES mean that ANY pc from 2006 beats consoles at any new game, when in reality only pcs from 2006 that cost at least 2-3 times more than consoles might qualify. In every post since that first, you've claimed that what you said was (or at least has the same meaning as) a sentence that has a different meaning. Just because your original statement contains the other statement, doesn't mean they have the same meaning. Cheers! 8)

1. my pc is really **** bad like it cant play games that were relased in 2005 without crashing 2.even if i buy a new pc it would be expensive as **** 3.once u buy the best pc on the market- theres another that is better than yours in a week 4, there are barely any pc exclusive gamesTheSlyCooper

2. What's expensive to you?

3.Why does it matter that's how we evolve. That doesn't mean your system is unplayable.

4. Really? I hope you mean PC exclusives that you like.

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]Yep. I'll say again I never argued with that statement. "A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles" =/= "even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles." You keep repeating the first one, and trying to say I'm arguing with it. The statement you said initially, that I refuted is the second one. As I've explained over and over, those two statements do not have the same meaning.

I have no problem accepting that someone who paid 2-3 times more for a pc in 06 can run games better than someone who bought a console at the same time. "A pc from 2006 plays games better than consoles." Is there a pc from 2006 that plays games better than consoles? Yes. Therefore the statement is true. We're in complete agreement about that one, and have been the whole time.

"Even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles." THAT is what you said was not true. Because it isn't. The subject, "you" is referring to anyone who "has a pc from 2006." In order for the statement to be true, the subject (anyone who has a pc from 2006) has to "know that it plays any game better than consoles." Since not all pcs from 2006 can play any game better than consoles, the statement is false. Obviously not everyone with a pc from 2006 can't know that it plays any game better than consoles if every pc from 2006 actually can. Now. Shall we go around the circle one more time?

ianuilliam

this statement

"A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles"

and this statement

"even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

have basically the same meaning, that a pc (not every pc) will play any game better than consoles

also i never said "anyone who has a pc from 2006"

Anyway, it is quite obvious that you are trying to cover the truth with all this arguments about statements, grammar etc, because you don't like that an ancient pc can play games better than consoles.

The second sentence "even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than pcs" doesn't actually mean the same thing. It's possible English isn't your native language, I don't know you, so I try not to judge. Instead, I'll continiue to try to explain the difference. The first part "even if you have a pc from 2006," is called a conditional, or an "if-clause." IF the condition in the clause is true, then whatever is in the main sentence body following the clause is also true (note: the sentence I just used to explain conditionals is an example of a sentence starting with a conditional). Alternatively, the main sentence can come before the conditional with the same meaning.

So the conditional in your sentence, "even if you have a pc from 2006" sets the condition to be owning a pc from 2006. As long as someone owns a pc from 2006, the condition is met. Now in the other sentence above, the lack of specificity is what allows the sentence to be true. As long as there is one pc that fulfills the criteria, "a pc plays ..." is true. In this case though, that same lack of specificity is what makes the whole sentence false, because as long as the person owns "a pc," the conditional is met. If the condition is met, then "you already know it plays any game better than consoles" should be true. But since a $300 off the rack single core with integrated graphics fulfills the conditional, yet doesn't result in "knowing that it plays any game better than consoles (or at all)," the entire sentence is false.

See? That wasn't too complicated. Grammar is pretty easy, really. Now as to the rest of your post, how is it "quite obvious that I want to cover the truth because I don't like that a (6 year old) pc can play games better than consoles" when I have repeatedly agreed with that? The problem I had with your initial statement was that it very clearly DOES mean that ANY pc from 2006 beats consoles at any new game, when in reality only pcs from 2006 that cost at least 2-3 times more than consoles might qualify. In every post since that first, you've claimed that what you said was (or at least has the same meaning as) a sentence that has a different meaning. Just because your original statement contains the other statement, doesn't mean they have the same meaning. Cheers! 8)

well, my first statement it doesn't refer to "ANY PC" but in "a PC". "a PC" can be interpret as only one or many but not all of them.

also with that logic i can say:"even if you have a pc from 2011, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

and you answer: "no because there are pc's that don't even have GPU"

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

this statement

"A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles"

and this statement

"even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

have basically the same meaning, that a pc (not every pc) will play any game better than consoles

also i never said "anyone who has a pc from 2006"

Anyway, it is quite obvious that you are trying to cover the truth with all this arguments about statements, grammar etc, because you don't like that an ancient pc can play games better than consoles.

MK-Professor

The second sentence "even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than pcs" doesn't actually mean the same thing. It's possible English isn't your native language, I don't know you, so I try not to judge. Instead, I'll continiue to try to explain the difference. The first part "even if you have a pc from 2006," is called a conditional, or an "if-clause." IF the condition in the clause is true, then whatever is in the main sentence body following the clause is also true (note: the sentence I just used to explain conditionals is an example of a sentence starting with a conditional). Alternatively, the main sentence can come before the conditional with the same meaning.

So the conditional in your sentence, "even if you have a pc from 2006" sets the condition to be owning a pc from 2006. As long as someone owns a pc from 2006, the condition is met. Now in the other sentence above, the lack of specificity is what allows the sentence to be true. As long as there is one pc that fulfills the criteria, "a pc plays ..." is true. In this case though, that same lack of specificity is what makes the whole sentence false, because as long as the person owns "a pc," the conditional is met. If the condition is met, then "you already know it plays any game better than consoles" should be true. But since a $300 off the rack single core with integrated graphics fulfills the conditional, yet doesn't result in "knowing that it plays any game better than consoles (or at all)," the entire sentence is false.

See? That wasn't too complicated. Grammar is pretty easy, really. Now as to the rest of your post, how is it "quite obvious that I want to cover the truth because I don't like that a (6 year old) pc can play games better than consoles" when I have repeatedly agreed with that? The problem I had with your initial statement was that it very clearly DOES mean that ANY pc from 2006 beats consoles at any new game, when in reality only pcs from 2006 that cost at least 2-3 times more than consoles might qualify. In every post since that first, you've claimed that what you said was (or at least has the same meaning as) a sentence that has a different meaning. Just because your original statement contains the other statement, doesn't mean they have the same meaning. Cheers! 8)

well, my first statement it doesn't refer to "ANY PC" but in "a PC". "a PC" can be interpret as only one or many but not all of them.

also with that logic i can say:"even if you have a pc from 2011, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

and you answer: "no because there are pc's that don't even have GPU"

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="EvanTheGamer"]Among many things related to convenience, the answer is just the games. Consoles get more. *nb4listsofunheardofgamesandindiecrap*EvanTheGamer

Here's the Spreadsheet. Feel free to read it.

In the end it is what you like

If you like RPGs, action/adventures it is xbox 360

If you like MMOs, RTS, old school adventures, strategy it is PC

I like consoles better, i rarely play on PC and mostly heroes of M&M and some adventures

[QUOTE="EvanTheGamer"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"] Nope Pc gets morelundy86_4

Here's the Spreadsheet. Feel free to read it.

Nice fake list for PC

Witcher 2 and Crysis are listed as PC exclusives, when both are on xbox 360

Machinarium is coming to PS3

Amnesia developer is planning to move to consoles too

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="EvanTheGamer"] Cool like what? *nb4listsofunheardofgamesandindiecrap*loosingENDS

Here's the Spreadsheet. Feel free to read it.

Nice fake list for PC

Witcher 2 and Crysis are listed as PC exclusives, when both are on xbox 360

Machinarium is coming to PS3

Amnesia developer is planning to move to consoles too

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Here's the Spreadsheet. Feel free to read it.

04dcarraher

Nice fake list for PC

Witcher 2 and Crysis are listed as PC exclusives, when both are on xbox 360

Machinarium is coming to PS3

Amnesia developer is planning to move to consoles too

One thing is for sure, this list has Witcher 2 and Crysis as PC exclusives when they are not anymore

Also as a RPG gamer myself (only single player), how does PC have more games ? It has no JRPGs, no Dark Souls and xbox 360 has Witcher 2, so i would say xbox 360 has like 5x more games for me to play

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Nice fake list for PC

Witcher 2 and Crysis are listed as PC exclusives, when both are on xbox 360

Machinarium is coming to PS3

Amnesia developer is planning to move to consoles too

loosingENDS

One thing is for sure, this list has Witcher 2 and Crysis as PC exclusives when they are not anymore

Also as a RPG gamer myself (only single player), how does PC have more games ? It has no JRPGs, no Dark Souls and xbox 360 has Witcher 2, so i would say xbox 360 has like 5x more games for me to play

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] Now come on now Crysis and the Witcher 2 was an Pc exclusive, Crysis on Consoles took 4 years and some major changes to get it to work so really its not "same"game. We are in a multiplatform gaming world now Pc only dev's are working on consoles and console only dev's are working on Pc versions also so its not a big deal, but Pc gets more games then consoles no if ands or buts.04dcarraher

One thing is for sure, this list has Witcher 2 and Crysis as PC exclusives when they are not anymore

Also as a RPG gamer myself (only single player), how does PC have more games ? It has no JRPGs, no Dark Souls and xbox 360 has Witcher 2, so i would say xbox 360 has like 5x more games for me to play

Still, the fact is i get to play far more RPGs on my 360 and all PC RPGs i want like ME1-2-3, Witcher 2 and Skyrim

PC just gets half of what i want to play, xbox 360 gets it all, which is a huge difference

When ignorance is bliss, asking the ignorant why they enjoy what they experience over what they have not experienced is not going to produce a logical response. This is exactly the same as asking poor people that go to Taco Bell why they enjoy that over 5 star dining.

When ignorance is bliss, asking the ignorant why they enjoy what they experience over what they have not experienced is not going to produce a logical response. This is exactly the same as asking poor people that go to Taco Bell why they enjoy that over 5 star dining.

Skreltch

Exactly, people think that getting a bit better visuals on PC in Withcer 2 can actually replace the experience of playing both Withcer 2 and Dark Souls on xbox 360 (and Lost Odyssey, Fable 2, Tales of Vesperia, Fable Journey, Dust, BlueDragon etc too)

Completly agree, one must first experience the varied RPG library of xbox 360 to be able to appreciate its offering

Also

Skyrim gets some huge DLC packs on xbox 360 a whole 30 days before any other system

Mass Effect 3 gets exclusive Kinect support only on xbox 360, not on PC

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Nice fake list for PC

Witcher 2 and Crysis are listed as PC exclusives, when both are on xbox 360

Machinarium is coming to PS3

Amnesia developer is planning to move to consoles too

loosingENDS

One thing is for sure, this list has Witcher 2 and Crysis as PC exclusives when they are not anymore

Also as a RPG gamer myself (only single player), how does PC have more games ? It has no JRPGs, no Dark Souls and xbox 360 has Witcher 2, so i would say xbox 360 has like 5x more games for me to play

One thing is for sure, this list has Witcher 2 and Crysis as PC exclusives when they are not anymore

loosingENDS

Saolin232 you know how the rules work, when/if the Witcher 2 is released on 360 it will no longer be exclusive, until it does it is.

Mass Effect 3 gets exclusive Kinect support only on xbox 360, not on PC

loosingENDS

Really that is a surprise especially after all the PC gamers petitioned for kinect for the PC version :roll:

[QUOTE="Skreltch"]

When ignorance is bliss, asking the ignorant why they enjoy what they experience over what they have not experienced is not going to produce a logical response. This is exactly the same as asking poor people that go to Taco Bell why they enjoy that over 5 star dining.

loosingENDS

Exactly, people think that getting a bit better visuals on PC in Withcer 2 can actually replace the experience of playing both Withcer 2 and Dark Souls on xbox 360 (and Lost Odyssey, Fable 2, Tales of Vesperia, Fable Journey, Dust, BlueDragon etc too)

Completly agree, one must first experience the varied RPG library of xbox 360 to be able to appreciate its offering

Also

Skyrim gets some huge DLC packs on xbox 360 a whole 30 days before any other system

Mass Effect 3 gets exclusive Kinect support only on xbox 360, not on PC

uhhhhh you seem to have missed the point completely...also, Skyrim pc has mod support....

In the end it is what you like

If you like RPGs, action/adventures it is xbox 360

loosingENDS

Saolin232/Ablefa3 the PC has more RPGs and Action games then the 360 has most of the multiplats are better on PC, plus PCs get all the shiney MMORPGS.

The 360 doesn't have a single exclusive RPG on the way.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

In the end it is what you like

If you like RPGs, action/adventures it is xbox 360

tenaka2

Saolin232/Ablefa3 the PC has more RPGs and Action games then the 360 has most of the multiplats are better on PC, plus PCs get all the shiney MMORPGS.

The 360 doesn't have a single exclusive RPG on the way.

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

In the end it is what you like

If you like RPGs, action/adventures it is xbox 360

sickcrack

Saolin232/Ablefa3 the PC has more RPGs and Action games then the 360 has most of the multiplats are better on PC, plus PCs get all the shiney MMORPGS.

The 360 doesn't have a single exclusive RPG on the way.

Same as i fail to see the point of playing MMO no 5098 and grinding for half your life just to be better at a virtual world

Also i dont see how anyone would miss games like Dark Souls

Same as i fail to see the point of playing MMO no 5098 and grinding for half your life just to be better at a virtual world

Also i dont see how anyone would miss games like Dark Souls

loosingENDS

Really? When you where hyping the fable series you made a huge point of 'unlimited replayability' in a virtual world?

Alot of people like me like Dark Souls but hack and slash games are not for everyone.

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]See, that's actually wrong. Maybe that's what you meant when you said it, but it's not what it means. You see, in the first sentence, you are saying "a pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles." What that sentence means is that a pc (at least one pc, maybe more, but not necesarily all of them) can play any game better than consoles. This is a reasonable statement, and true, as there are pcs (granted, they cost $1200 at the very least, possible quite a bit more) made in 2006 that can in fact play any game (well, any game that is on pcs at least) at better graphics settings and/or higher performance than current consoles.

The second sentence "even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than pcs" doesn't actually mean the same thing. It's possible English isn't your native language, I don't know you, so I try not to judge. Instead, I'll continiue to try to explain the difference. The first part "even if you have a pc from 2006," is called a conditional, or an "if-clause." IF the condition in the clause is true, then whatever is in the main sentence body following the clause is also true (note: the sentence I just used to explain conditionals is an example of a sentence starting with a conditional). Alternatively, the main sentence can come before the conditional with the same meaning.

So the conditional in your sentence, "even if you have a pc from 2006" sets the condition to be owning a pc from 2006. As long as someone owns a pc from 2006, the condition is met. Now in the other sentence above, the lack of specificity is what allows the sentence to be true. As long as there is one pc that fulfills the criteria, "a pc plays ..." is true. In this case though, that same lack of specificity is what makes the whole sentence false, because as long as the person owns "a pc," the conditional is met. If the condition is met, then "you already know it plays any game better than consoles" should be true. But since a $300 off the rack single core with integrated graphics fulfills the conditional, yet doesn't result in "knowing that it plays any game better than consoles (or at all)," the entire sentence is false.

See? That wasn't too complicated. Grammar is pretty easy, really. Now as to the rest of your post, how is it "quite obvious that I want to cover the truth because I don't like that a (6 year old) pc can play games better than consoles" when I have repeatedly agreed with that? The problem I had with your initial statement was that it very clearly DOES mean that ANY pc from 2006 beats consoles at any new game, when in reality only pcs from 2006 that cost at least 2-3 times more than consoles might qualify. In every post since that first, you've claimed that what you said was (or at least has the same meaning as) a sentence that has a different meaning. Just because your original statement contains the other statement, doesn't mean they have the same meaning. Cheers! 8)

ianuilliam

well, my first statement it doesn't refer to "ANY PC" but in "a PC". "a PC" can be interpret as only one or many but not all of them.

also with that logic i can say:"even if you have a pc from 2011, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

and you answer: "no because there are pc's that don't even have GPU"

Once again i am not referring to any pc. just because you don't have a pc capable of playing games, that doesn't mean that this statements is false, because their are others that have a pc from 2006 that can play games better than consoles.

PC Gaming is dead because the PC concept is dead. Unless you are a multimedia producer, you are not going to need a separate metal box in the corner, especially not for gaming when the library continues to shrink to obscurity.EvanTheGamer

But the PC has more games and makes more money then any other platform?

I have read these boards for a long time and never posted. But, I will post here. I don't game on a PC because I want to sit in my lazy boy chair and play games on my 60 LED TV. I want to use a controller, not a keyboard and mouse. I think I share that sentement with a lot of current 360 games, since the average age of a 360 gamer ( last I read) was in his/her 20s; not some pre-teen regulated to his/her bedroom. StormyJoe

The average age of a PC gamer is like 40.

[QUOTE="StormyJoe"]I have read these boards for a long time and never posted. But, I will post here. I don't game on a PC because I want to sit in my lazy boy chair and play games on my 60 LED TV. I want to use a controller, not a keyboard and mouse. I think I share that sentement with a lot of current 360 games, since the average age of a 360 gamer ( last I read) was in his/her 20s; not some pre-teen regulated to his/her bedroom. GD1551

The average age of a PC gamer is like 40.

I heard it was 65.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="StormyJoe"]I have read these boards for a long time and never posted. But, I will post here. I don't game on a PC because I want to sit in my lazy boy chair and play games on my 60 LED TV. I want to use a controller, not a keyboard and mouse. I think I share that sentement with a lot of current 360 games, since the average age of a 360 gamer ( last I read) was in his/her 20s; not some pre-teen regulated to his/her bedroom. tenaka2

The average age of a PC gamer is like 40.

I heard it was 65.

Nah it's 40 haha. Would have been hilarious it was 65 though.

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

The average age of a PC gamer is like 40.

GD1551

I heard it was 65.

Nah it's 40 haha. Would have been hilarious it was 65 though.

The average age of a console gamer is 10.

Don't ask me where I got that information but it's a FACT

[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

this statement

"A pc from 2006 can play any game better than consoles"

and this statement

"even if you have a pc from 2006, you already know it can play any game better than consoles."

have basically the same meaning, that a pc (not every pc) will play any game better than consoles

also i never said "anyone who has a pc from 2006"

Anyway, it is quite obvious that you are trying to cover the truth with all this arguments about statements, grammar etc, because you don't like that an ancient pc can play games better than consoles.

MK-Professor

compared to the new ones yes it is ancient.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

I heard it was 65.

Eggimannd

Nah it's 40 haha. Would have been hilarious it was 65 though.

The average age of a console gamer is 10.

Don't ask me where I got that information but it's a FACT

No it is not, console gamers are not even born yet

Nice fake list for PC

Witcher 2 and Crysis are listed as PC exclusives, when both are on xbox 360

Machinarium is coming to PS3

Amnesia developer is planning to move to consoles too

loosingENDS

It's fake because it has yet to be updated? :lol: Saolin, :lol:

Anyway, The Witcher 2 will remain exclusive until it's released on the 360. That's the way it works here. Crysis just needs to be removed.

The average age of a console gamer is 10.

Don't ask me where I got that information but it's a FACT

Eggimannd

it's 30 something if you want to know the real age.

[QUOTE="Eggimannd"]

The average age of a console gamer is 10.

Don't ask me where I got that information but it's a FACT

GD1551

it's 30 something if you want to know the real age.

Link to source? :?

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Nice fake list for PC

Witcher 2 and Crysis are listed as PC exclusives, when both are on xbox 360

Machinarium is coming to PS3

Amnesia developer is planning to move to consoles too

lundy86_4

It's fake because it has yet to be updated? :lol: Saolin, :lol:

Anyway, The Witcher 2 will remain exclusive until it's released on the 360. That's the way it works here. Crysis just needs to be removed.

Witcher 2 is a multiplatform game, it is also on xbox 360

And the list is fake, Crysis 1 and Witcher 2 are not in any way PC exclusives