Something people seriously need to understand console FPS vs pc FPS rating.

While I do agree that the Halo series is an amazing series as far as consoles goes, there's nothing that ticks me off more than a fanboy saying something like "Zomg Halo 2 getting 9.4 means it's better than Half Life 2 getting 9.2 (I am not a hermit and I don't wanna bash Halo. Just an easy example to take). No, just stop fooling yourself. Computers are the kings of FPS and it is widely known. Maybe some of you might prefer console FPS to be better (I really can't see how. Someone has to explain this to me) but it is a general consensus that FPS on computers are better (obviously not all).

Scores are relevant to the platform (or consoles as far as FPS go). Halo series got such good scores (higher than Half Life series in some places) ONLY because it was being compared to console FPS and NOT to pc FPS. Some people really need to understand this.

BioShock: 9.0 on PC, 9.0 on the Xbox 360. And they were the exact same game.-Tretiak

Because like you said yourself they're the exact same game (except maybe the graphics and controls). That's an exception =/3ggman

Ah, of course. Feel free to ignore any exceptions in order to fit your thesis. And them being the same game doesn't do your point any good, by the way - in fact, them scoring the same proves that the standards for shooters on the Xbox 360 are no lower than the PC. Now, this isn't me saying that this has always been the case; I am well aware that, in the past, what you are saying was completely true. But the differences are minimal today. The Xbox 360 is getting some great shooters, whichever standards you apply to them.

[QUOTE="-Tretiak"]BioShock: 9.0 on PC, 9.0 on the Xbox 360. And they were the exact same game.peacebringer

Congratulations. So the only real advantage that PC shooters have these days is modifications. The actual games are now judged equally.

Computers are the kings of FPS and it is widely known.

3ggman

QFE.

I'm already tired of halo 3, but I still play BF2 and UT2k4 on the PC.

[QUOTE="3ggman"]Because like you said yourself they're the exact same game (except maybe the graphics and controls). That's an exception =/-Tretiak

Ah, of course. Feel free to ignore any exceptions in order to fit your thesis. And them being the same game doesn't do your point any good, by the way - in fact, them scoring the same proves that the standards for shooters on the Xbox 360 are no lower than the PC. Now, this isn't me saying that this has always been the case; I am well aware that, in the past, what you are saying was completely true. But the differences are minimal today. The Xbox 360 is getting some great shooters, whichever standards you apply to them.

Yes the standards on the Xbox 360 for shooters ARE lower than on computer. FPS on the computers have a lot more competition to go against. Bioshock getting the same score doesn't prove anythin cause BOTH ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.

[QUOTE="-Tretiak"]

[QUOTE="3ggman"]Because like you said yourself they're the exact same game (except maybe the graphics and controls). That's an exception =/3ggman

Ah, of course. Feel free to ignore any exceptions in order to fit your thesis. And them being the same game doesn't do your point any good, by the way - in fact, them scoring the same proves that the standards for shooters on the Xbox 360 are no lower than the PC. Now, this isn't me saying that this has always been the case; I am well aware that, in the past, what you are saying was completely true. But the differences are minimal today. The Xbox 360 is getting some great shooters, whichever standards you apply to them.

Yes the standards on the Xbox 360 for shooters ARE lower than on computer. FPS on the computers have a lot more competition to go against. Bioshock getting the same score doesn't prove anythin cause BOTH ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.

Ugh, you're completely missing the point. The games are the same, exactly. And they scored the same on the Xbox 360 and PC. Now what does that tell you about standards?

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

BioShock: 9.0 on PC, 9.0 on the Xbox 360. And they were the exact same game.-Tretiak

They aren't *exactly* the same. I mean, they have the same stuff, but the speed, difficulty, and interfaceare different.

While I do agree that the Halo series is an amazing series as far as consoles goes, there's nothing that ticks me off more than a fanboy saying something like "Zomg Halo 2 getting 9.4 means it's better than Half Life 2 getting 9.2 (I am not a hermit and I don't wanna bash Halo. Just an easy example to take). No, just stop fooling yourself. Computers are the kings of FPS and it is widely known. Maybe some of you might prefer console FPS to be better (I really can't see how. Someone has to explain this to me) but it is a general consensus that FPS on computers are better (obviously not all).

Scores are relevant to the platform (or consoles as far as FPS go). Halo series got such good scores (higher than Half Life series in some places) ONLY because it was being compared to console FPS and NOT to pc FPS. Some people really need to understand this.

3ggman

crysis... AAAA?....(it better be..)

[QUOTE="3ggman"][QUOTE="-Tretiak"]

[QUOTE="3ggman"]Because like you said yourself they're the exact same game (except maybe the graphics and controls). That's an exception =/-Tretiak

Ah, of course. Feel free to ignore any exceptions in order to fit your thesis. And them being the same game doesn't do your point any good, by the way - in fact, them scoring the same proves that the standards for shooters on the Xbox 360 are no lower than the PC. Now, this isn't me saying that this has always been the case; I am well aware that, in the past, what you are saying was completely true. But the differences are minimal today. The Xbox 360 is getting some great shooters, whichever standards you apply to them.

Yes the standards on the Xbox 360 for shooters ARE lower than on computer. FPS on the computers have a lot more competition to go against. Bioshock getting the same score doesn't prove anythin cause BOTH ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.

Ugh, you're completely missing the point. The games are the same, exactly. And they scored the same on the Xbox 360 and PC. Now what does that tell you about standards?

Well consider this. In 2004, Halo 2 came out for Xbox and scored 9.4; Half-Life 2 came out for PC and scored 9.2, and Half-Life 2 won shooter of the year.

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

FragMonkey09

Notice the recent part, Halo 2 was 3 years old..

[QUOTE="FragMonkey09"]

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

user_nat

Notice the recent part, Halo 2 was 3 years old..

PC = Mouse and Keyboard + Mods = better experience over console any day = end of senseless argument = All gamers on same page

/thread

[QUOTE="user_nat"][QUOTE="FragMonkey09"]

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

numba1234

Notice the recent part, Halo 2 was 3 years old..

Its upgraded/doesn't look dated and bundled with 4 (I think?) other games.. yeah.

[QUOTE="numba1234"][QUOTE="user_nat"][QUOTE="FragMonkey09"]

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

user_nat

Notice the recent part, Halo 2 was 3 years old..

Its upgraded/doesn't look dated and bundled with 4 (I think?) other games.. yeah.

It's Half Life, that's why it will score well. It doesn't need senseless hype and mountain dew.

[QUOTE="peacebringer"][QUOTE="-Tretiak"]BioShock: 9.0 on PC, 9.0 on the Xbox 360. And they were the exact same game.-Tretiak

Congratulations. So the only real advantage that PC shooters have these days is modifications. The actual games are now judged equally.

I get the point you're trying to make but Half-Life 2 scored AA on the Xbox (I believe an 8.4), the game doesn't exactly lend itself to your arguement. PBSnipes

I get the point you're trying to make but Half-Life 2 scored AA on the Xbox (I believe an 8.4), the game doesn't exactly lend itself to your arguement. PBSnipes

I get the point you're trying to make but Half-Life 2 scored AA on the Xbox (I believe an 8.4), the game doesn't exactly lend itself to your arguement. PBSnipes

Because it run like **** looked like **** and played like **** in comparison? Smae situation with Half-Life 1 on the PS2.

[QUOTE="FragMonkey09"]

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

user_nat

Notice the recent part, Halo 2 was 3 years old..

seing halo 3 is almost exactly like halo 2 with few addons like forge and some player, means halo 3 also won't appeal to any one who played those shooters on pc

Counterexample to the Half life 2 one:

Halo 2 and UT04 both get 9.4 in the same year. Halo 2 has better SP than UT04 (we can all agree on that I hope). You'd say that then UT04 would just walk away with MP GOTY. It didn't. Same situation as half life 2, just turned around. What's the reason for that then?

i prefer fps on 360 - although pc has the framerate advantage

people say pc is better for fps : just because of the faster keyboard / mouse controll - but i prefer the 360 , it's more balanced : everyone is using the same exact thing (or really close) - there's no hardware advantages

i'm just better than most with the 360 controller - compared to where im average with a mouse and keyboard

also 360 has voice communication where most pc games are silent

While I do agree that the Halo series is an amazing series as far as consoles goes, there's nothing that ticks me off more than a fanboy saying something like "Zomg Halo 2 getting 9.4 means it's better than Half Life 2 getting 9.2 (I am not a hermit and I don't wanna bash Halo. Just an easy example to take). No, just stop fooling yourself. Computers are the kings of FPS and it is widely known. Maybe some of you might prefer console FPS to be better (I really can't see how. Someone has to explain this to me) but it is a general consensus that FPS on computers are better (obviously not all).

Scores are relevant to the platform (or consoles as far as FPS go). Halo series got such good scores (higher than Half Life series in some places) ONLY because it was being compared to console FPS and NOT to pc FPS. Some people really need to understand this.

3ggman

You are wrong. Standards on the PC are not higher, they are different.

Counterexample to the Half life 2 one:

Halo 2 and UT04 both get 9.4 in the same year. Halo 2 has better SP than UT04 (we can all agree on that I hope). You'd say that then UT04 would just walk away with MP GOTY. It didn't. Same situation as half life 2, just turned around. What's the reason for that then?

11Marcel

Interesting. I think only gamespot could explain this. I never actually played Halo 2 online or completed the SP (as strange as that may seem considering how much I enjoyed the SP in 1 and 3) but I would go as far as saying UT 2004 is better then the MP in Halo 3. Would PC games have the same chance of winning GOTY awards as console ones or are there other factors at work here? I personally can't understand them giving Halo 2 MP GOTY over UT 2004 unless it was better then the MP in halo 3. That said, I often can't understand Gamespot's GOTY choices :?

Yes the standards on the Xbox 360 for shooters ARE lower than on computer. FPS on the computers have a lot more competition to go against. Bioshock getting the same score doesn't prove anythin cause BOTH ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.

3ggman

Nope. Look at PC to console ports of FPS games like Half-Life and Rainbow Six. They ae inferior. So no, you are wrong.

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

FragMonkey09

What do you expect . It was like 3 years old with no improvements.

[QUOTE="3ggman"][QUOTE="-Tretiak"]

[QUOTE="3ggman"]Because like you said yourself they're the exact same game (except maybe the graphics and controls). That's an exception =/-Tretiak

Ah, of course. Feel free to ignore any exceptions in order to fit your thesis. And them being the same game doesn't do your point any good, by the way - in fact, them scoring the same proves that the standards for shooters on the Xbox 360 are no lower than the PC. Now, this isn't me saying that this has always been the case; I am well aware that, in the past, what you are saying was completely true. But the differences are minimal today. The Xbox 360 is getting some great shooters, whichever standards you apply to them.

Yes the standards on the Xbox 360 for shooters ARE lower than on computer. FPS on the computers have a lot more competition to go against. Bioshock getting the same score doesn't prove anythin cause BOTH ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.

Ugh, you're completely missing the point. The games are the same, exactly. And they scored the same on the Xbox 360 and PC. Now what does that tell you about standards?

To be fair Bioshock does have better graphics and slightly better/faster controls (no need to pause the game to switch between pasmids etc...) on the PC. Not that it makes a hug difference in the score.

[QUOTE="11Marcel"]

Counterexample to the Half life 2 one:

Halo 2 and UT04 both get 9.4 in the same year. Halo 2 has better SP than UT04 (we can all agree on that I hope). You'd say that then UT04 would just walk away with MP GOTY. It didn't. Same situation as half life 2, just turned around. What's the reason for that then?

JimmyT2

Interesting. I think only gamespot could explain this. I never actually played Halo 2 online or completed the SP (as strange as that may seem considering how much I enjoyed the SP in 1 and 3) but I would go as far as saying UT 2004 is better then the MP in Halo 3. Would PC games have the same chance of winning GOTY awards as console ones or are there other factors at work here? I personally can't understand them giving Halo 2 MP GOTY over UT 2004 unless it was better then the MP in halo 3. That said, I often can't understand Gamespot's GOTY choices :?

Edit: Dug it up, and indeed the online setup was a big pro. They apparantly didn't waver for too long:

"Indeed, among all the multiplayer games of the year, we quickly settled on Halo 2 as the best. Even those of us typically accustomed to playing first-person shooters exclusively on the PC generally agreed that what Bungie accomplished with Halo 2's multiplayer offering is nothing short of amazing."

Counterexample to the Half life 2 one:

Halo 2 and UT04 both get 9.4 in the same year. Halo 2 has better SP than UT04 (we can all agree on that I hope). You'd say that then UT04 would just walk away with MP GOTY. It didn't. Same situation as half life 2, just turned around. What's the reason for that then?

11Marcel

Halo 2 kinda started the Console online craze right? It had a good working system, and was quite good... nay .. the ebst on the consoles for Online play.

UT2004 was just a good improvement over UT2003 , nothing new to its audiance really.

Its not jsut awarded by overall package like "Halo 3 GOTY Voters" think ... its what it does, is it new? is it unique?

Halo 3 this year has nothing but forge/Replay in that department this year, neither does UT3 , Team Fortress 2 is a unique style and finally brought preoper class-based team FPS to the consoles , Crysis ... majorly explands on the Free-roam/Battlefield Multiplayer and boasts same graphical power as CGI movies .... Quake Wars wont win anything really, nice game, I doutb it would work well on the consoles, and its othing new to the PC.

Pc= King of Fps,MMORPGS and Rts.

Consoles= Kings of Adventure games,fighting games,racing games,platformers,RPGs,TPS.

Wii= King of Party games.

[QUOTE="11Marcel"]

Counterexample to the Half life 2 one:

Halo 2 and UT04 both get 9.4 in the same year. Halo 2 has better SP than UT04 (we can all agree on that I hope). You'd say that then UT04 would just walk away with MP GOTY. It didn't. Same situation as half life 2, just turned around. What's the reason for that then?

Meu2k7

Halo 2 kinda started the Console online craze right? It had a good working system, and was quite good... nay .. the ebst on the consoles for Online play.

UT2004 was just a good improvement over UT2003 , nothing new to its audiance really.

Its not jsut awarded by overall package like "Halo 3 GOTY Voters" think ... its what it does, is it new? is it unique?

Halo 3 this year has nothing but forge/Replay in that department this year, neither does UT3 , Team Fortress 2 is a unique style and finally brought preoper class-based team FPS to the consoles , Crysis ... majorly explands on the Free-roam/Battlefield Multiplayer and boasts same graphical power as CGI movies .... Quake Wars wont win anything really, nice game, I doutb it would work well on the consoles, and its othing new to the PC.

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"][QUOTE="11Marcel"]

Counterexample to the Half life 2 one:

Halo 2 and UT04 both get 9.4 in the same year. Halo 2 has better SP than UT04 (we can all agree on that I hope). You'd say that then UT04 would just walk away with MP GOTY. It didn't. Same situation as half life 2, just turned around. What's the reason for that then?

11Marcel

Halo 2 kinda started the Console online craze right? It had a good working system, and was quite good... nay .. the ebst on the consoles for Online play.

UT2004 was just a good improvement over UT2003 , nothing new to its audiance really.

Its not jsut awarded by overall package like "Halo 3 GOTY Voters" think ... its what it does, is it new? is it unique?

Halo 3 this year has nothing but forge/Replay in that department this year, neither does UT3 , Team Fortress 2 is a unique style and finally brought preoper class-based team FPS to the consoles , Crysis ... majorly explands on the Free-roam/Battlefield Multiplayer and boasts same graphical power as CGI movies .... Quake Wars wont win anything really, nice game, I doutb it would work well on the consoles, and its othing new to the PC.

Not that I know of nope it doesnt, if all 3 versions were released within a year it would of had a chance with the whole "Play against all 3 systems" gimmick maybe, but nope, well ... except it has a full blown Single-Player this time around aswell.

Not that I know of nope it doesnt, if all 3 versions were released within a year it would of had a chance with the whole "Play against all 3 systems" gimmick maybe, but nope, well ... except it has a full blown Single-Player this time around aswell.

Meu2k7

Pc= King of Fps,MMORPGS and Rts.

Consoles= Kings of Adventure games,fighting games,racing games,platformers,RPGs,TPS.

Wii= King of Party games.

ProductNumber49

I just beat halo 3 3rd level, and am wondering is the 2nd level the worst level in the game? Because that level sucked hard, it should be called back tracked (the level),andalso am I the only one who hates Cortana as of now?numba1234

yes I think the first 2 levels are the worst in the whole game. It gets so much better, and the 4th and 7th level especially are so epic.

[QUOTE="numba1234"]I just beat halo 3 3rd level, and am wondering is the 2nd level the worst level in the game? Because that level sucked hard, it should be called back tracked (the level),andalso am I the only one who hates Cortana as of now?NoNam3r

yes I think the first 2 levels are the worst in the whole game. It gets so much better, and the 4th and 7th level especially are so epic.

I somewhat warmed to the 2nd level when I was going through the game for the 2nd time. I think the 6th and 7th level have the greatest impact the first time through. The 8th level is maybe the worst in retrospect but at least it's a change of pace from the other levels. One of the best things about the game is how different some of the levels play but because of this your going to love some levels and not like some others as much.

[QUOTE="ProductNumber49"]

Pc= King of Fps,MMORPGS and Rts.

Consoles= Kings of Adventure games,fighting games,racing games,platformers,RPGs,TPS.

Wii= King of Party games.

omgimba

I think he means action adventure, very few adventure games are on consoles and the best ones are on PC without a doubt. Sierra's quest series alone beats anything consoles have ever had in the genre. The genre is less prolific these days but the PC still gets a nice steady low of low profile ones to this day.

[QUOTE="3ggman"]

Computers are the kings of FPS and it is widely known.

Khanezhyray

[QUOTE="Khanezhyray"]

[QUOTE="3ggman"]

Computers are the kings of FPS and it is widely known.

wok7

Yea in the 90's, nowadays PC is only king of RTS and MMORPG.

Until mice and keyboards become standard devices on consoles, they will never be in the same league as PC shooters.

Controllers simply don't allow for the same type of competitive gameplay that mice and keyboards do.

Halo 2 for PC got a 7.0

Quote: "Halo 2 for Vista is a solid game that probably won't appeal to anyone who's played any recent high-profile PC shooters."

I win.

FragMonkey09

Half-Life 2 for Xbox got an 8.3

Quote: "Half-Life 2 for Xbox is basically just the acclaimed single-player campaign for Half-Life 2. And that's why Half-Life 2 for the Xboxcomes off asa bitunderwhelming."

See I can do that too. Outdated ports can ruin the scores of PC games as well...

And no, halo 2 scoring better than half-life 2 doesn't mean it's better, but IMO after playing Half-Life 2 and HL2 Deathmatch quite a bit and numerous mods including CS:Source, the Hidden, Dystopia, Gerry's Mod, Art of Ascension, Source Forts, and Day of Defeat Source, I belive Halo 2 to be the better game.The multiplayer was just too addictive and fun.

BioShock: 9.0 on PC, 9.0 on the Xbox 360. And they were the exact same game.-Tretiak

Uh, obviously. What did you expect? One to score .5 higher? I 100% agree that PC is the king of FPS and it has the best shooters. People also need to realize that PC shooters might score a tad lower due to system requirements, but that doesn't mean that it's worse. Oh no, quite the opposite.