Playstation & Co outclassing PC?

misterX · Post by **misterX** » 20 Dec 2005, 16:17

I realize that consoles have far more gaming power now than what they had some years ago, but should pc games be neglected and miss out on the fun that is only exclusive to the consoles?
Take the Metal Gear Solid series for example... both the first two games were released on pc soon after their playstation counter-parts ( "soon after", I mean at least a year). What happened to the third one?
Suddenly pc gamers have to roll over and die? Mind you, was it not for the computer would the console not exist.

Furion · Post by **Furion** » 20 Dec 2005, 16:24

I say that home of gaming will always be the PC and that it will never change. the console kids will realise that there is nothing better than running a game with a very fast cpu and awesome graphics. let it be known that even the most powerful console can only run the games at a very low detail compared to the PC. the only exception to this rule will be the PS3. but i say that with a decent graphics card and cpu. it will die.

the PC will live on forever...

style121 · Post by **style121** » 20 Dec 2005, 16:28

I'm not so sure about that, correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't the console here long before the personal computer became commonplace, ie the atari, the spectrum, etc.

Computers aren't going to fall away by no means. Its just a very different market. Consoles are user friendly, or at least the past generation ones were. Hence the reason they're so popular. You don't need to be a techie to play one, and you can play it aound your coffee table in the lounge against friends. I suppose you could bring lanning into the equation, but thats not always as easy as setting up a console.

The problem now is that pc's already have caught up to the current consoles being sold ( Xbox 360 ), except an Xbox is far more affordable than a pc with the same specs. So its only a matter of time before every user has the same specs as the xbox or ps3, and then those consoles will start becoming less favourable.

Bobendren · Post by **Bobendren** » 20 Dec 2005, 16:34

There're other games besides quake?

style121 · Post by **style121** » 20 Dec 2005, 16:38

Quake? Whats that?

StarPhoenix · Post by **StarPhoenix** » 20 Dec 2005, 16:57

The Sinclair ZX Spectrum was a small home computer, not a console.

Post by **ryanrich** » 20 Dec 2005, 17:09

supertwit wrote:The Sinclair ZX Spectrum was a small home computer, not a console.

Indeed it was! First released in 1982, and featuring a whopping 16K or 48K RAM! 8O

The Original pamphlet!

http://www.earth.ox.ac.uk/~steve/Spectrum/

StarPhoenix · Post by **StarPhoenix** » 20 Dec 2005, 17:20

I still have mine! I used to hack most of my games and change certain values/text strings, with comic results
[For example "You have caught a Tench weighing 2581 pounds!" and "There is a cute pink troll in the musty cave."]

amdretard · Post by **amdretard** » 20 Dec 2005, 18:19

All the console users go on about how much cheaper having a console is.
But i beg to differ

this calculation are based that a gamer buys on average 20 games a year all legal and they are all estimates

xbox 360 R4000 = R4000
games R500 X20 = R10000
Total = R14000

Average gaming pc = R8000
games R300 X 20 = R6000
Total = R14000

Um now a console is said to last 4 years til the new edition is to be released

3 years of games
xbox 360 games R500 X60 = R30000

PC game R300 X 60 = R18000

difference = R12000

that means in 3 years you have R12000 to keep up with the games until the new console comes out

Now which is cheaper you tell me. Feel free to challenge me on this

DAE_JA_VOO · Post by **DAE_JA_VOO** » 20 Dec 2005, 18:38

What i really don't understand about people who have consoles or that say consoles are better than PCs, is that a console has beatiful graphics when it comes out, it could even compete with some of the best PC graphics of that point in time. But that only lasts for a few months until ATi or nVidia bring out their new cards. Then you realise how crap console graphics really are.

I mean, look at a PS2's graphics. It's USELESS.

Also, consoles have usually got a crap resolution aswell. What's the average tv's res? 800x600? 640x480? I'm speaking under correction on this point.

I34z1k · Post by **I34z1k** » 20 Dec 2005, 19:16

I have a PS2. It rox. Nice for tekken. And I can play Gran Turismo. Thats all I bought it for. Comps are by far the best.They are upgradable and its easier to get games if anyone catches my drift? I am not saying anything bad.

Zell · Post by **Zell** » 20 Dec 2005, 19:17

Computers are the best for rich people.... Playstations are the best for most gamers on this planet... hence the immense popularity of console gaming.

Consoles started it all, and they will one day end it all...

Abatis · Post by **Abatis** » 20 Dec 2005, 19:21

Correction: Computers are the best for smart people....

check amdretard's post for proof

Zell · Post by **Zell** » 20 Dec 2005, 19:27

AMD retards prices are his own made up thing... Im sorry, but a console is cheaper in the long run!

So MOOO!!! Cheese anyone?

I34z1k · Post by **I34z1k** » 20 Dec 2005, 19:39

Console = tv aswell. Rich aswell. Dont forget the TV!

megabytes000 · Post by **megabytes000** » 20 Dec 2005, 21:43

Zell_D wrote:Playstations are the best for most gamers on this planet... hence the immense popularity of console gaming.

Well....Consoles are designed solely for games, which is why their hardware was chosen for games alone (and possibly multimedia), hence making them cheaper then PCs. Have you ever seen a console with a Hard Drive as a requirement? Besides, console mobos dont have to have
SATA or RAID or whatever else.

But Consoles are (sometimes) cheaper than their PC equals.

Well there's my 2c

NealeDeadlyAlien · Post by **NealeDeadlyAlien** » 20 Dec 2005, 21:49

misterX wrote:I realize that consoles have far more gaming power now than what they had some years ago, but should pc games be neglected and miss out on the fun that is only exclusive to the consoles?
Take the Metal Gear Solid series for example... both the first two games were released on pc soon after their playstation counter-parts ( "soon after", I mean at least a year). What happened to the third one?
Suddenly pc gamers have to roll over and die? Mind you, was it not for the computer would the console not exist.

Yes, also Resident Evil games, the first 3 were on PC but then they stopped, that pis*ed me off because I preferred RE on PC than PS anyday. So I have no clue why developers are switching over. Yes if it wasn't for the PC, no one would of known about console, while correct me if I am wrong they use computers to develop console games huh.

I will stick with PC all the way.

AlphA · Post by **AlphA** » 20 Dec 2005, 22:18

I owned a PS2 until recently. I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means....recently started playing PC games again (after years)....and I gotta say, console games cannot compare to those played on a decent PC.

Just my opinion...

amdretard · Post by **amdretard** » 20 Dec 2005, 23:02

Zell_D wrote:AMD retards prices are his own made up thing... Im sorry, but a console is cheaper in the long run!

So MOOO!!! Cheese anyone?

i just proved that the consoles are not cheaper
look at my post . take alook at this

put all that in a excel document and i worked out that to be exactly the same after 4 years you need to buy 5 games a year and who buys 5 a year

StarPhoenix · Post by **StarPhoenix** » 21 Dec 2005, 07:51

A personal view......

Me.....well, I seldom buy 5 a year......I seldom buy full-price, R300+ games, but wait until the titles I want the most are on sale or re-released under a budget [R49.95-R99.95 for PC and under R200 for PS2] label-or I do some bargain hunting at second-hand stores... , but back on topic.......I am lucky enough to have both a PC and a PS2 and feel that having both makes for a more complete gaming experience so far as I am concerned
[your mileage may vary] On my PS2 I can take out my frustrations on the characters in Soul Calibur 3, enjoy Final Fantasy X and X-2 and engage in over-the-top big-mech acion in Zone of the Enders all while using the pretty useful controller bundled with the console. My PC provides a different type of experience in the form of CRPGs such as Baldur's Gate and Planetscape:Torment. There are still many more Realtime Strategy titles available for PC than for console, though USB mice and keyboards are available for the latter [Perhaps RTS didn't prove that popular among the console-only crowd?] and so I play the likes of Warcraft and The Battle for Middle Earth on my PC.

Sure, the PC can be upgraded to surpass console-level graphics several times over a given period if one is able to throw enough money at it, but should gaming be all about having the household equivalent of high-budget CG?

Graphics are only part of what makes a game enjoyable for me. When I buy a title for any platform, I chose it for the hours of fun it will give me, not necessarily for the eye-candy alone. An aside: I think that the PS2 does an admirable job considering it has only 32mb sytem memory, 4mb graphics RAM and a
299Mhz CPU.

....and yes, I still find Tetris highly addictive.

bushy8ones · Post by **bushy8ones** » 21 Dec 2005, 14:18

I have a PS2. It rox. Nice for tekken. And I can play Gran Turismo. Thats all I bought it for. Comps are by far the best.They are upgradable and its easier to get games if anyone catches my drift? I am not saying anything bad.

I have a pc. And i play Diablo 2, FEAR, Jagged Alliance2, DOOM3, Half Life...
dont you just love PCs

Mozz · Post by **Mozz** » 21 Dec 2005, 16:31

I have both, and therefore keep away from these sort of topics

Zell · Post by **Zell** » 21 Dec 2005, 16:33

I have both too.... PC owns PS when it comes to FPSs... mmmkay?

Post by **Cameron_Losco** » 21 Dec 2005, 16:56

For me gaming on a PC is better for most games but a console is also a brilliant piece of work. FIFA, for instance, is much better on a PS2 for the simple reason that multiplaying is a lot more fun - you can really get into the game with you mate next to you on the couch. There are other examples like Tekken and so on but not going to get into it because this wasnt the intention of the initial post so I'm going to focus on that rather.

I think that it has everything to do with money, as with what amdretard said PS2 games are generally more expensive. PC games sell for R300 - R400 and the average for a PS2 game is about R500. I cant imagine there being that much of a price difference between producing a normal DVD to a PS2 disc so therefore I would imagine that the profits would be higher. Maybe I'm completely off the mark but thats my view.

StarPhoenix · Post by **StarPhoenix** » 21 Dec 2005, 17:14

Cameron.......It could be that the higher cost of PS2 and any other console games can be accounted for by the developers having to pay the console creator-SONY in this instance, royalties......but I am only guessing....

PCFormat Forum Archive

Playstation & Co outclassing PC?

Playstation & Co outclassing PC?

Re: Playstation & Co outclassing PC?