Oh, my friend, I most certainly have. In fact, the one I did see was very memorable.

Well that's the thing, there aren't any shooters that can captivate me by their gameplay alone. Because it's just look and shoot, absolutely no thinking put in to it aside from reaction time and positioning...

Narrative and visual aspects are really the only things left after that, so that's why I cherish the parts between the mindless shooting, because I can finally see something (hopefully) intelligent happen. Max Payne 3 was a great game for me, but even though it did have the little bits between shooting, it still felt gratuitous. Max is literally just shooing hundreds of bad guys and THAT is the fluff, not the cutscenes. The cutscenes are when stuff actually happens, and the shooting feels like fluff.

The only games that really deserve to have their gameplay in full focus, are RPGs, RTSs, platformers, ect. ect. As long as it isn't narrative focused.

That's all my opinion though. And again, I'm not saying I didn't enjoy MP3 (I haven't played the first two btw) or Spec Ops The Line or Binary Domain, 3 games with very similiar structure. I'm just saying that the shooting often feels completely monotonous and devoid of strategy aside from "aim for thehead and stay in cover".

My friend, as a former professional Quake 3 player. To me, Call Of Duty is like watching children with hot-wheels pretend they are professional racers.

If you played Quake 3 as I did, your comprehension would be widened and a greater understanding would be achieved.

Very soon Quake Live will be relaunched on steam very soon, a prime opportunity to see a game designed for men.

Lol that might be your personal preference, but it's the polar opposite of proper pacing. Good pacing means breaks in action. If you have constant shooting all the fucking time like in Spec Ops the line or Binary Domain the game will get boring fast and sequences won't have any impact.

I respect your opinion my friend. It's very life enriching.

Thinking about it, it's probably difficult for Call Of Duty as a competitive game due to the sheer volume and frequency the games released. Likewise the disconnected DLC of maps, weapons, perks and so on.

A game like Quake 3 (in the whimsical wonderful days ) you bought Quake 3. Possibly Team Arena expansion pack. That was that.

• I can use any controller or multiple controllers at once, including mouse & keyboard, Xbox One controllers, DualShock 4's, or all of them at once. There is a lot more choice with PC, I'm not locked in to the few overpriced peripherals that the platform holders choose for me.
• Many games, even PC exclusives, are designed with native Xbox controller support. You can still play games from your couch displayed on your big TV in the living room if you want to - the PC is no longer relegated to the office like it was 10 years ago.

Ok. Second point pretty much means that PC's are on par with consoles, it's not an advantage for PC.

• The PC is capable of displaying higher fidelity visuals and effects at much higher resolutions and framerates than any console. PC games always look better and run better than their console counterparts. PC games can be played at 1440p and up to 144hz while even current generation console games still struggle with 1080p and 30hz, sometimes 60hz (but not usually). Even "remastered" games like The Last of Us still struggle to maintain 1080p/60 on the PS4, sometimes dipping down in the mid-40 fps range.

True

• Online multiplayer on PC is always free and not locked behind a paywall like it is with PSN and Xbox Live.

True, but you fail to mention the paywall does bring some benefits, it's not exclusively a bad thing.

• The PC has far more exclusive titles released than any other console, in any generation, in addition to many of the same multiplatform titles that are released for the consoles as well. Only when they are on PC, they look & run better.

Allright, it does have more games, but the quality of games is subjective opinion, more games does not have to mean better games. You already mentioned games run better on PC, no need to repeat yourself 3 times.

• The PC can be used for far more than just entertainment - it's a device that I can use for content production, school work, editing photos, curating my music collection, and more.

Irrelevant, everyone has a PC/laptop these days.

• The PC is a constantly evolving platform that is always growing in power, whereas the consoles are locked in without innovation or advancement for sometimes up to 9 years in the case of the 360 & PS3. My current PC is already much more powerful and capable than even the PS4 or Xbox One, and over time that gap is only going to widen further and further.

You already mentioned this in 2 previous points.

• PC games are less expensive. Not only are even multiplatform games almost always less expensive when released on PC, but PC games go on sale through outlets such as Steam, GOG, GreenManGaming and others far more often and for much steeper discounts than console games ever do. Developers love Steam sale events like the Summer & Winter sales, sometimes making more profits in a single week than they did during the entire year leading up to that.

BS, consoles have used games, trade-ins, store sales, I've seen a lot of good PSN sales etc. PC might have a slight edge, but not a huge one as you say. New games are 10$ cheaper, ok.

• PC's are designed to use and take advantage of multiple monitors, allowing experiences that are simply not available on console. If you haven't gamed on 3+ monitors at once, you're seriously missing out and I recommend giving it a try, you'll never go back.

Ok, I guess... don't see how this is relevant to most people.

• The PC is the king of backwards compatibility. I can play any game I wish released at virtually any point in the PC's history with little to no problem, most of them installing directly from Steam in minutes. The current consoles offer no backwards compatibility whatsoever - Sony, MS, and Nintendo are more than happy to sell you the same games over and over again, though. This does not happen on PC.

Agreed, a huge plus for PC, I don't think anyone has the time and money to play each game in every generation that they would want and with PC you can revisit them years later with not much hassle. With consoles you'd have to keep your old one and you might have trouble finding old games for sale.

• The PC has by far the largest and most diverse game library out of any platform, current or past.

You already mentioned that it has most exclusives etc. stop repeating yourself.

• Developers build mod support into their games so the thriving PC mod community can get much more life out of games. This does not exist on consoles. See current games like Divinity: Original Sin and ArmA 3 for examples on how devs encourage modding and make it easy through the Steam Workshop.

Allright.

• PC is the most friendly platform for developers. Anyone can create and release a game on PC that millions of gamers have access to without paying licensing fees to the likes of Sony or Microsoft, and at little to no overhead cost. It is the most friendly platform for the thriving independent game developer scene.
• You can actually make money playing games and creating assets & mods for games on PC, and companies like Valve encourage this through the Steam Workshop and Market. Nothing like this exists on consoles.

These 2 points are only relevant to developers, not to gamers. I guess you could say that means more content on PC but that was already mentioned.

• There are far more Free To Play games on PC that are actually good games with business models that aren't horrible. Games like DotA 2 and Marvel Heroes are truly free to play. You can spend money for cosmetics or quality of life improvements but you don't need to at all. Again, nothing like this exists on consoles.

There are more good f2p games on pc but to say there are none on consoles is BS, don't know where you pulled this one from.

• The PC is overall less expensive to own than a console, and this becomes more drastic the more games one buys. A gaming PC that equals the PS4 or Xbox One in performance can be built for $400-$500 and then upgraded in a couple of years to easily surpass the capabilities of those locked and closed platforms, and the price disparity only grows as console gamers buy more and more expensive games over the lifespan of their console while PC gamers enjoy more & less expensive games.

Personally, I don't think we can effectively discuss this, I mean it all depends on what you buy, how many games you buy... someone could spend the whole gen with a console and buy games only when they are 5-10$, someone could be buying 2 new games a month but always selling them on craiglist, someone might not always have PS+, gold, there's tons of console game sales, trade-ins, used games etc. you just choose to ignore it. This is a really hard topic to agree on, we can't really set a standard here and say each gamer only buys new games each month for 60$, especially since some PC games are also 60$ now. I wouldn't sway this argument in any direction, it all depends on individual spending habits.

• The competitive / professional eSports scene lives on PC. Games like Dota 2 have tournaments like the International that had over $11 million dollars in prize money to be won this year - nothing like this exists on consoles.

• Ignorant again, call of duty world champs had 1m $ prize pool. It's not 11m but it's not non-existent. I really like competitive gaming but I wouldn't say this is a huge plus, unless you're the one competing and winning money.

There are more reasons but I'll leave it at that. Try to keep the discussion on topic - if you don't think the PC is the objectively superior gaming platform, then which one is and why? "LOL hermits" is not a valid argument. Please try to keep the discussion civil and on-topic, I don't want to have to create this again in a few weeks...but I totally will.

Thanks for reading and have fun!