the reason is simple it's because pc games can be copied and once u buy a pc game it then has ZERO value as for an xbox 360 game it has resale valuegibson-les-rick

Stop making stuff up. You can easily pirate games on 360, even more easy then PC. No hazzle with cracks and whatnot. Just download and play. So just keep quiet if you don't know what you're talking about instead of making stuff up.

The real reason is there is no licensing fee on the PC. It's a free platform that isn't owned by anyone. While, the 360 is owned by Microsoft. The extra bucks those games cost are going to Microsoft because it's the licensing fee they uphold. That's also why consoles are relatively cheaper (when they are released that is) then buying the hardware separetely because Microsoft can earn it back with games because of the licensing fee.

PC isn't owned by anyone that's why there obviously couldn't even be a licensing fee involved. But just stop kidding yourself comparing 360 to PC's. It could be done a year ago, it can't be done now anymore. A good PC murders the 360 and the PS3, and no it doesn't cost millions. Just around 500, 600 dollars and you are done. There is a huge misconception (ironicly, among those who know nothing about PC's) about PC gaming costs. In the long run it's far cheaper then consoles. Especially when you count game prices and microtransactions into it.

i dont think the compaies matter as long as the gameplay is goodwilltsherman

And that is why the company matters.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]I'm fine with 30fps. :|Raidea

Yes, I don't see what the big deal is. 60fps is more for racing, sport and action games. Most console FPSs are 30fps.

Trust me, if you ever played a shooter at more then 60 FPS, say, 100 or more and you would go back to 30FPS, you will think the game was pulled straight out of a portal of hell.

TC, here's a little fact for you; COD4, which looks better than HL2, has a framerate of 60fps+, and is on the 360. Now, you can do three things;

1) Admit you don't know what the hell you are talking about, and admit defeat

2) Come up with an excuse

3) Vanish

Verge_6

Uh, you did know we were talking about frame rate here? Didn't you?

Yeah well, its to bad it wont play smoothly, but its also not a big deal considering the game will be playing ocmparable to the highest PC settings. also for Dreams-Visions 60fps being a bare minimum is a kind of strange thing to say considering you cant even nnotice a difference in fps after a certain point, and that certain point is less than 60 fps.

its like when Sony talked about 180 fps... it sounds cool but means nothing.

hazuki87

This is so not true. You can see a difference far beyond 60FPS. If a game is running at 60FPS and running at 100+FPS after that for comparison, I can see it perfectly. If you can't there is something wrong with your vision.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

They're making a sequel to that piece of trash!?

Zeliard9

Did you play Far Cry on PC or consoles? Piece of trash? Christ.

Probably on consoles. It was much better on PC at the time.

Crysis does look good.

But its not worth the cash you need to spend to be able to play it.

beardtm

Here we go again. You can build a PC for 600 bucks that can run Crysis. If you already have a rig it's possible you don't even have to upgrade to run it. If you already have a rig and want to run it in max settings, you spend maybe 300-400 bucks and you're good for the next 4 years. Start accepting PC's aren't as expensive as fanboys make them out to be.

FarCry 2 does look good, but Crysis looks better in my opinion.