Which is your favorite Micrsoft platform: Xbox 360 or Windows for PC

Both are heavily supported. Both bring in revenue for Microsoft. Which do you prefer?

360 for games, Windows for everything else.

Windows 7 owns the 360 in every way possible. DOes does vista and xp for that matter.

360 for games, Windows for everything else.

mitu123

Are you trying to prove MS owns the PC?

360 for games, Windows for everything else.

mitu123

Xbox 360 for 90% of my gaming

Windows for 5% of my gaming and everything else (liek a million things, composing music, making my own XBLA game in XNA, drawing etc etc)

And the other 5% of gaming goes to PS3, Wii

Well my Xbox hasnt been used in over a year now. so its: Windows 7 for my PC and Wii Gaming needs. (90%) PS3 for the few inbetween console games that are actual worthwhile (10%)Birdy09

Well, what games do you like ?

Because you surly have missed most of the best 360 games

I love gaming on my pc, sold my 360 and got a ps3 since the ps3 is a blu-ray player that happens to play all the console games I might want to try.

[QUOTE="Birdy09"]Well my Xbox hasnt been used in over a year now. so its: Windows 7 for my PC and Wii Gaming needs. (90%) PS3 for the few inbetween console games that are actual worthwhile (10%)theseekar

Well, what games do you like ?

Because you surly have missed most of the best 360 games

Both are heavily supported. Both bring in revenue for Microsoft. Which do you prefer?

bphan

Windows for gaming

consoles=only for exclusive games.

I use them both; games like Assassins Creed are better played with controllers then a keyboard and mouse (my opinion). Also, some games are badly ported to the PC so I get the Xbox 360 version. savetehhaloz

Windows 7.

Um, Windows is a program, not a platform. Nice try though trying to make it seem like MS has ownership over PC.

Um, Windows is a program, not a platform. Nice try though trying to make it seem like MS has ownership over PC.

1Stark1

Umm...yes it is. :? Developers develop games for PCs running Windows 7. Without the OS in place as a platform, the games themselves cannot run.

[QUOTE="1Stark1"]

Um, Windows is a program, not a platform. Nice try though trying to make it seem like MS has ownership over PC.

The_Game21x

Umm...yes it is. :? Developers develop games for PCs running Windows 7. Without the OS in place as a platform, the games themselves cannot run.

[QUOTE="1Stark1"]

Um, Windows is a program, not a platform. Nice try though trying to make it seem like MS has ownership over PC.

The_Game21x

Umm...yes it is. :? Developers develop games for PCs running Windows 7. Without the OS in place as a platform, the games themselves cannot run.

No it's not. The operating system is just part of the platform as a whole.

Just like you cant play anything on a PC w/o a operating system, you cant put a copy of ME2 on a copy of Windows 7 and "will" it to play.

Both are heavily supported. Both bring in revenue for Microsoft. Which do you prefer?

bphan

[QUOTE="bphan"]

Both are heavily supported. Both bring in revenue for Microsoft. Which do you prefer?

2mrw

Both are heavily supported. Both bring in revenue for Microsoft. Which do you prefer?

[QUOTE="2mrw"][QUOTE="bphan"]

Both are heavily supported. Both bring in revenue for Microsoft. Which do you prefer?

WilliamRLBaker

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="1Stark1"]

Um, Windows is a program, not a platform. Nice try though trying to make it seem like MS has ownership over PC.

-Feath-

Umm...yes it is. :? Developers develop games for PCs running Windows 7. Without the OS in place as a platform, the games themselves cannot run.

I was commenting on OSes in general being platforms for games to be developed and run on, not just Windows 7. I am aware that you can technically run Windows games on non Windows OSes in the same way you can technically (but not legally) run SNES games on a PC. I was merely stating that the OS is the platform much in the same way the Xbox 360 and PS3 are platforms.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="1Stark1"]

Um, Windows is a program, not a platform. Nice try though trying to make it seem like MS has ownership over PC.

FragTycoon

Umm...yes it is. :? Developers develop games for PCs running Windows 7. Without the OS in place as a platform, the games themselves cannot run.

No it's not. The operating system is just part of the platform as a whole.

Just like you cant play anything on a PC w/o a operating system, you cant put a copy of ME2 on a copy of Windows 7 and "will" it to play.

And the operating system is one of the most vital parts of the platform as a whole. For example, you can't run the PC version of Mass Effect without a capable processor or GPU but even if you had those things, without a Windows OS, you still wouldn't be able to run it. Windows was the platform Mass Effect was designed to run on. Without that platform, you can't run the game, even if all other requirements are met.

PS: Yes I am aware of ways you can technically run Windows games on other OSes but that is not how they were intended to be played so I am discarding those for the sake of this argument.

[And the operating system is one of the most vital parts of the platform as a whole. For example, you can't run the PC version of Mass Effect without a capable processor or GPU but even if you had those things, without a Windows OS, you still wouldn't be able to run it. Windows was the platform Mass Effect was designed to run on. Without that platform, you can't run the game, even if all other requirements are met.

PS: Yes I am aware of ways you can technically run Windows games on other OSes but that is not how they were intended to be played so I am discarding those for the sake of this argument.

The_Game21x

.. The difference is this.. If the Windows platform didn't exist another one would take its place.. Furthermore Microsoft does not get revenue drieclty fromt eh games nor do they control any facet of their development, they most certainly do for the Xbox360..

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[And the operating system is one of the most vital parts of the platform as a whole. For example, you can't run the PC version of Mass Effect without a capable processor or GPU but even if you had those things, without a Windows OS, you still wouldn't be able to run it. Windows was the platform Mass Effect was designed to run on. Without that platform, you can't run the game, even if all other requirements are met.

PS: Yes I am aware of ways you can technically run Windows games on other OSes but that is not how they were intended to be played so I am discarding those for the sake of this argument.

sSubZerOo

.. The difference is this.. If the Windows platform didn't exist another one would take its place.. Furthermore Microsoft does not get revenue drieclty fromt eh games nor do they control any facet of their development, they most certainly do for the Xbox360..

[QUOTE="-Feath-"][QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

Umm...yes it is. :? Developers develop games for PCs running Windows 7. Without the OS in place as a platform, the games themselves cannot run.

The_Game21x

I was commenting on OSes in general being platforms for games to be developed and run on, not just Windows 7. I am aware that you can technically run Windows games on non Windows OSes in the same way you can technically (but not legally) run SNES games on a PC. I was merely stating that the OS is the platform much in the same way the Xbox 360 and PS3 are platforms.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="-Feath-"] You can run "windows" games on non-windows operating systems. Sure, they won't be as great as the operating system they were designed for, but saying that they can't run isn't true. It isn't like putting a 360 disc into a PS3 and being able to do literally nothing; you can do almost literally anything you want with a PC - some things would take more effort, but at the end of the day things *could* be done.-Feath-

I was commenting on OSes in general being platforms for games to be developed and run on, not just Windows 7. I am aware that you can technically run Windows games on non Windows OSes in the same way you can technically (but not legally) run SNES games on a PC. I was merely stating that the OS is the platform much in the same way the Xbox 360 and PS3 are platforms.

Do developers officially support running games that were designed for Windows on other operating systems? Does Bioware offer patches for gamers who are having trouble running...say...Mass Effect on Linux or Mac? Does Sony offer support for someone running a PS1 game on their PC? No.

That's the difference here. Games designed for Windows are not intended to run on Mac OSX, Linux or any other OS you can think of and developers do not support the unofficial ways of running their games either. They support the game on the platform it was designed for and none other.

[QUOTE="-Feath-"][QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

I was commenting on OSes in general being platforms for games to be developed and run on, not just Windows 7. I am aware that you can technically run Windows games on non Windows OSes in the same way you can technically (but not legally) run SNES games on a PC. I was merely stating that the OS is the platform much in the same way the Xbox 360 and PS3 are platforms.

The_Game21x

Do developers officially support running games that were designed for Windows on other operating systems? Does Bioware offer patches for gamers who are having trouble running...say...Mass Effect on Linux or Mac? Does Sony offer support for someone running a PS1 game on their PC? No.

That's the difference here. Games designed for Windows are not intended to run on Mac OSX, Linux or any other OS you can think of and developers do not support the unofficial ways of running their games either. They support the game on the platform it was designed for and none other.

Having two crappy choices is the reason many people don't vote at all.

Windows 7 on the PC.

The OS is constantly evolving, and it supports a wide range of GPUs and CPUs.

The 360 uses the foundation of the Radeon HD 2000 series for graphics. ATI has released quite a few GPUs since then.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="-Feath-"] Beta blockers were designed for use treating high blood pressure, arrhythmia and other heart related problems. Beta blockers can also be used by athletes to reduce their heart rate and perform better. One drug, doing the same thing with two difference outcomes. This wasn't its intended use, but it is very good at doing both. The only thing in common between the two is the "hardware" or the heart. Just because a game was designed with Windows in mind doesn't mean that it is "windows exclusive". There is no such thing as "windows exclusive". Take one game, doing the same thing with three different outcomes. Windows, Mac, Linux. o p e n s y s t e m s-Feath-

Do developers officially support running games that were designed for Windows on other operating systems? Does Bioware offer patches for gamers who are having trouble running...say...Mass Effect on Linux or Mac? Does Sony offer support for someone running a PS1 game on their PC? No.

That's the difference here. Games designed for Windows are not intended to run on Mac OSX, Linux or any other OS you can think of and developers do not support the unofficial ways of running their games either. They support the game on the platform it was designed for and none other.

Yes it is. Support is a very large part of gaming in general and especially PC gaming. Developers are constantly rolling out patches, upgrades and balancing tweaks for games and they do not support running their games on operating systems they were not built for. Valve is a prime example of this. Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead 1 and 2 as well as many other games have been greatly improved through updates and patches and so on. Support may not have been a big part of gaming years ago but it is now.

The mere fact that you mentioned that Windows games run with "varying degrees of success" on other OSes is emblematic of the problem with this argument. When developers decide to develop a game on the PC, they typically choose one or more operating systems as their platform for developing these games on and NOT the PC as a whole.

My preference is definitely XBox 360. I don't bother with PC gaming.

Having two crappy choices is the reason many people don't vote at all.

Pug-Nasty

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"][QUOTE="2mrw"] both bring in revenue for M$ ?!!!!! what is the point of mentioning that ??? as some of the posters said ..... MS doesn't own PC like you are trying to imply.-Feath-

Microsoft may not be in your PC, but is in 99.999% of gamer PCs out there

It is like not everyone has a 360, but about 30% of the console market have, which is what matters

Same, not everyone has windows to game on PC, but 99.999% of gamers do

Windows, of course. There's so much more I can do with it in addition to gaming.

Windows for gaming. I have an Xbox 360 that I barely use now. Plus PC games are a lot cheaper on average and the variety of games is pretty amazing.