Metro 2033 didn't feel consolised at all even when it went on xbox 360, so I don't think so

OB-47

seriously the game looked bad even for pc when it was released.lightleggy

[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="deangallop"]

Who cares when they can play the VASTLY superior sequel?

deangallop

FEAR 1 had a bigger impact when it was released than FEAR 2 did.

but other than that, side by side, Fear 1 is a joke compared to the sequel.

The plot, the weapons, atmostphere, gameplay diversity, setpieces, everything.

More like a lot of console gamers overexagerate the level of graphics in many console games. I still recall the "Uncharted 2 looks better than Crysis" threads that popped up in late 2009.

Sure, not every PC game released is a graphic powerhouse. Tweak a pair of settings and the difference gives you the shivers. Just look at those GTA4 screenshots and compare them with the console version - think that this can be done with virtually every game.

Mograine

[QUOTE="VanDammFan"]

[QUOTE="Jankarcop"]

you know PC has won when the main debate here is that pc is just "moderatly better" instead of "vastly better"

:lol::lol:

NanosuitLover

OH I was thinking more along the lines of "The truth has finally been spoken"..Now if PC gamers would just admit it we can move on..All be friends and live happily together..

Just admit what? That PC is only "slightly better"? Let me give you a thought excersise to prove your bias. Imagine a new console comes out next month, it can go over 1080p resolutions, capable of 60fps on the majority of games, have advanced dx11 equivalent rendering and effects like shadows, particles, and shaders, as well much higher res textures, high texture filtering and AA (jagged edge smoothing for the tech illiterate) and advanced physics, along with more in depth games with larger scale. You would be like "Oh my god! This is the NEXT GENERATION of consoles". Well, PC does all those things I just listed, yet you refuse to give it credit because its not a "console" per say, its bias, plain and simple.

[QUOTE="ratchet_usa"]

The only game that looked better then the best PS3 exclusive was crysis, a corridor fps with and great phsyics and barely any enenies on screen.

If this game is runing on a PC that has 4x the Ram on the PS3, a much better and faster GPU, and a more powerfull CPU then the Cell ( I doubt it).

Then pc gamers must really have low standards. Better graphics don't make for a better game. It's all about gameplay and that is where PC game fail hard.

PC games need a new way to play games k/M is an abysmal way to try to play shooters.

Brainkiller05

PC games are miles ahead, the only people who disagree are astonishingly enough... console gamers, who haven't experienced PC gaming's potential. Put simply PC games are running in twice the resolution at twice the frame rate with better textures, draw distance and anti-aliasing, in other words; there's nothing to debate here.

Being able to render games in 1080p (not stretched 720p like on yawnsoles) with higher res textures and run at a constant 60fps instead of mostly 30 enough to justify that its a generation ahead? Superior lighting, shaders, and physics is another generation. So 2 generations aheadm, not anymore than that though.

NanosuitLover

[QUOTE="F1ame_Shie1d"]

[QUOTE="NanosuitLover"]

Killzone? Lolfail. Nothing special there, highly scripted AI in small linear levels with only one or two designated flanking roues. OOOOOOOOHHH I'm impressed!! Ever hear of ARMA 2? Every RTS game? They demonstrate better AI.

NanosuitLover

In any case to call Killzone AI bad is simply laughable. They aren't scripted at all. No battle plays out the same way.

Forget it, you are covered in a viel of ignorance. Really? Battles are VASTLY different each time? WOW you are a fool. And how is the RTS argument invalid? I just listed PC Games that have better AI so of course your gonna invalidate it with "Oh thats not fair, I'm gonna cry your a meany!". So its a game genre that requires good ai, it still proves PC Games have better AI. Does Killzone's AI engage in infantry, battles AND drive all manner of military land, sea, and air vehicles all in a completely open world 225 square kilometer map like in ARMA2? No. Get over it, if you think a six year old CPU in a console has nearly equal AI processing capability to a 2011 i7 2600k or AMD equivalent, I can't help you, the education system has already failed you.

lol

I would post a pic but i currently have no clothes on

[QUOTE="pomd1"]I agree, the only differences I see on PC are higher resolution, better draw distance, higher-res textures which doesn't make a huge difference. Not worth switching to PC.PublicNuisance

Cheaper games, mods, don't pay for online (if your comparing to 360), better lighting, the capabibility for better AI (haven't seen anything surpass F.E.A.R. whoch came out in 2005), there are more differences than what you state.