Why do people bother with PC games ?

Member
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
🌟 Senior Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Messages
351
Best answers
0
My PC is a gaming rig, I built it to game, but that doesn't mean I am forbidden to do anything else on it. :rolleyes:
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 20, 2003
Messages
3,211
Best answers
0
ZeroNightmare said:
the graphics on console games get better.... and i dont have to upgrade it

oooooo burn

does it sting?

i'm poor.
Yeah they get better: But guess what? You have to pay for those better graphics. You'll buy a new console for what? 200? 300? 400? Some crazy amount like that? Only to find that in a year they're worth 99.99. And then a new console comes out which is worth the same price 200-400 dollars and then in a year that will be obsolete and be worth 100 dollars. It's just like upgrading a computer- you're upgrading your consoles so you can play the newer games.

It doesn't cost a thousand dollars to upgrade your pc like you all think. A gig of ram is like 100 bucks. A gig of ram will last you a few years. The only thing that will be remotely costly is the brand spanking new cpu's which are a thousand, but you don't need that to play the latest games on all high. Get a 3800 or 3500- those will play fear and oblivion just fine with no lag.

So don't go telling me or anyone for that matter that it costs "so much money" to upgrade a PC. It doesn't.

If you build your rig specifically for gaming- that doesn't mean that the only thing you can do on it is game.

That's great that you don't see a point in PC's. You can stick to your consoles. But that doesn't mean you have to make false accusations about computers.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
1,179
Best answers
0
Consoles have one small advantage over the PC's (IM NOT TAKING SIDES LOL).

Sometimes, and I've seen it myself, the developers for PC's dont polish their games as much, as there are patches and expansions to get.

For the console, they know its a release that MUST be appreciated, so they try to polish it as far as they can go.

Secondly, consoles have... somewhat more variety of games. MGS, Soul Calibur 2, Hal0 2, PGR 2. Admittedly, we have some of these genres too. But we dont have the exact Sam Fisher, the exact Master Chief. Except in Halo 1. But Halo 1 for the PC is like licking kangaroo pelts.

We should make a PC > CONSOLE convention.

 

nge

New Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
464
Best answers
0
Consoles are pro. They have the best games ever with the best controls ever and do the best stuff ever because they are the best.

PC's are suck. I bought a dell and it doesn't run games well, and the only way you can get a gaming computer is to spend $5000 on an alienware computer and pay someone to upgrade the parts $500 every month. Also, the controls are limiting because you only get over 40 buttons to chose from. No one really builds computers unless they are nerds or ******s. You don't like men, you geeky nerd homo ***? Nerd.

In conclusion, I am right because you suck.

If this gets me a warning, so be it, but I can't stand it when people pass opinion as fact and I was hoping this would get the point accross.

I almost couldn't go through with that. The sarcasm hurt me.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 20, 2003
Messages
3,211
Best answers
0
nge said:
Consoles are pro. They have the best games ever with the best controls ever and do the best stuff ever because they are the best.

PC's are suck. I bought a dell and it doesn't run games well, and the only way you can get a gaming computer is to spend $5000 on an alienware computer and pay someone to upgrade the parts $500 every month. Also, the controls are limiting because you only get over 40 buttons to chose from. No one really builds computers unless they are nerds or ******s. You don't like men, you geeky nerd homo ***? Nerd.

In conclusion, I am right because you suck.



I almost couldn't go through with that. The sarcasm hurt me.
I knew from the moment you said "you keeky ner homo *** part because i build computers and we bone every night =/

i'll give you the fact that consoles have better controls when it comes to fighting games etc. But FPS... no way in hell. Except the Red Steel might change that :)
 

nge

New Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
464
Best answers
0
heh, I added a disclaimer. Most people who talk to me know that's fake because I built my latest computer myself.
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
2,462
Best answers
0
Eeeeh...I mostly a console player.

Why? I did not get a computer until I was 8, hell I didn't even play games on it until the new millennium. I grew up with NES, SNES, Sega Genesis, Gameboy and the Nintendo 64.

A lot of computer games are first person shooter or MMORPGS. I am not a big fan of FPS, I mean yeah I'll Half-Life here and there and Halo Live kicks ass, but I prefer the other genres, which would be action/adventure, fighting and a little RPG here and there, which are more console-friendly.

ESF, City of Heroes, and The Sims 2 are usually the computer games I play. I also couldn't go crazy with MMORPGS because 1 is already pretty time consuming, trying to build a whole new character in a whole new game would make it seem almost like work for me. Also, I like to multitask, meaning play my Playstation 2 while on the internet/chatting/typing/etc.

Though computer based games are more multi-player friendly, most of my friends are largely console players. Don't know if this point matters or not, but I wanted to have a discussion on an MMORPG or other computer game, only a select few would be able to hold a decent conversation, unlike if the topic was Grand Theft Auto or Madden.

I have this thing with taking up space in my computer...Games take up a lot and I really do not want to buy more hard drive memory. I was pissed when I first got City of Heroes when it said my graphics weren't good enough to run it at all...



Not like I am discriminating PC players, I am just strongly more of a console player.
 
New Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
515
Best answers
0
Chakra-X said:
I was pissed when I first got City of Heroes when it said my graphics weren't good enough to run it at all...
Surely you looked at the minimum system requirements? It's like buying a PS2 games for the PSX -_-


And good God! You haven't played stuff untill you were 8? :eek: I was 14 before I got my eager little teenager hands on a game.. -_-
 
Member
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
🌟 Senior Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Messages
351
Best answers
0
bapplebo said:
Admittedly, we have some of these genres too. But we dont have the exact Sam Fisher, the exact Master Chief.
We have Sam Fisher and Masterchief in the forms of Splinter Cell and Halo.

Not to mention all the mods that attempt to play homage to them.

Are the MGS and Splinter Cell guys named the same?
 
Cunning as Zeus
Banned
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 23, 2003
Messages
6,079
Best answers
0
In the pc version, Solid Snake is called Gaseous Snake and Sam Fisher is Bob.

They're the exact same games. PC versions just look better.
 
Freelance Mappzor
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
17,065
Best answers
0
Location
Stairing at the Abyss
The main point is.

FPS: console aiming is slower than muse and less acurate
Other than that. You can have more keylayouts managing what key does what. On a gamecontroler you are stuck with what the manufacturer tells you to press.

Also consoles have sucky resolution. If i remember correctly PS 1 had a resolution of 640x480 when teh PCs already had 1024x768. PS 2 is stuck with 800x600 when on the PC you can seet the resolution to what you like. Shure games may not run allways as smooth as on a console. But the fact that for a console you need
A) a TV
B) lots of cash cause games for PC are 1/3 the price of console games
C) even more cash cause the controlers keep breaking (2 of my friends had a PS2 and one a GC and they swiched about 2 controllers per year)

The only benifit of consoles is that you cant get a virus that ****s it up. But that will soon change since the newer consoles are trying to implant stuff like MP3 listening and stuff like that. Basicly the future of consoles looks like a PC thats hooked to a TV and has a gamecontroller >.<

Besides im shure noone here uses there PC for gaming alone.
 
New Member
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
1,478
Best answers
0
Um.. no offense, but you seem to be just pulling resolutions out of your behind.



Note that -most- PS2 games use 640x480, but many use even lower. PCs have been able to use much higher resolutions for (I'm not exaggerating) years and years and years.
 

Cho

New Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
10
Best answers
0
SaiyanPrideXIX said:
Alright. You're new here, it seems--I don't think much anyone else would borderline flame the board's most tempermental moderator in the middle of his own section, otherwise. But other than the Fanboy stuff--which is only borderline anyway--you were pretty civil, so I'm going to just respond.

The first thing I should probably say, is that I DO own a PS2 and an Xbox, though I never play the Xbox (because I can't stomach a 15 frame per second game online).

The second thing is akin to Kimfu's point--I bought this computer in 2001. I can still play pretty much everything. I don't upgrade because I can no longer play--it doesn't usually get to that point, ever, to be honest with you. It's more like I upgrade to improve the quality of the gaming experience, as the stronger games don't always run as well, but right up to Oblivion I managed to get my stuff working every time without any real problems.

I hope you realize that you made a lot of illogical statements when you quoted all those parts of my post. As you're about to learn, a debate with Pride is a hard thing to win.
I don't know where you get your figures. A powerful computer that can run anything put out for the next four or five years on max, is only about 900 dollars. Yeah you have your console for 10 years, but you seem to be under the impression that you have to shell out 3,000 bucks every two months to play the latest games. And as I said before, that only happens to uneducated consumers. As for power versus the consoles, I'm not even going to argue this; the consoles, mechanically, are a FRACTION of modern computers. When your Xbox has an SLI motherboard and a dual core processor with two monstrous 512 megabyte video cards in it, I'll change my stance on this. But that will never happen, because they are built invariably on current technology--it will NEVER be cost effective for any console manufacturer to put fully state of the art equipment into their machines. Granted, they don't necessarily need it, but still. They will always have low end versions of the parts in current circulation--and even if they WERE state of the art, a new video card or technology comes out every other month in the world of the PC, so it wouldn't last long at all.
I don't get this either. You have a very biased opinion of this. It's not being 'stuck' on an old game--it's somebody making a new, usually very creative one, out of your old game, and making it available to you for free. Free innovative games with consistent updates and great concepts = good, I can't see how you can find any other way to spin this. Welcome to the ESF forums, by the way.
The PC is the king of custom control schemes, so this is another moot point. You can completely customize the keys of any game, the only one I ever played where you couldn't was this drab anime game called 'Oni' which, ironically, would have been a lot more at home on the PS1. You get one controller, maybe a steering wheel, and a keyboard and mouse addon for consoles (that you can barely use because your sitting on a couch and not at a desk). Well the PC has flightsticks, laser mice, game mice (mine has five buttons--all assignable on a per game basis), and best of all there are controllers available for the PC (again, all with customizable keys for all games) that have a million shapes and sizes, including that of the PS2 and Xbox controllers. Yeah you've got your little stylus thing on the DS, but we have that too; the new Nintendo controller is only just catching up to the capability of the mouse, which is--what? 25-30 years old? Even once it DOES catch up, it's sensitivity will probably be completely unadjustable and I bet all kinds of things will screw with its signal. We have wireless laser mice, too, have for years. Nice of the consoles to try to play catchup, after so long.
I was referring to customization on MY end. I have over 40 user-made add-ons for World of Warcraft. In Halo you get to pick one of 8 colors, on one of three character models. There is an entire other website dedicated to ESF itself, and additional character models, maps, sound effects, graphical sprites. In the world of the PC, is someone out there sees a way a game can be made better, he can ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Not just sit and hope when he pays fifty bucks for the inevitable sequel, that the developers made it better. In a lot of situations, it is WE THE GAMERS of the PC world who have defined new kinds of gameplay and such in our games. World of Warcraft is the perfect example--do you know how many of the UI components in that game's current patch, were originally add-ons, which made the developers go, "Hey, that is a pretty good idea, that should be a part of the game in the first place!" We have a voice, and a choice in how we play--console gamers don't.
As I said, I own both sides of the coin, and have found the PC to be uniliaterally better. Calling me undedicated when your main gripe is that having a PC is a costly bother is a little asinine, don't you think? I am willing to spend more money and more effort on my gaming habit then you; any avid PC gamer is, bottom line. You want it to be cheap and easy, you want instant gratification, and you don't care if you have to pay 50 bucks every two weeks to get mediocre games, so long as you don't have to exert any effort in making them perform better or be more enjoyable to yourself. That's fine and all, but calling me undedicated to gaming is probably the furthest thing from the truth you could say.
I don't know what internet you've been on, man. I can play World of Warcraft with 10,000 people and no lag with the graphics as high as they go (on a five year old computer). I can play Unreal Tournament on hundreds of servers which appear instantly in the list the millisecond I click online. I can TYPE. I can download other apps and files off the internet directly to my computer. In Unreal Tournament when I connect to a place that is using maps that I don't have, it downloads them--in like 15 seconds. I don't need to use a clunky controller to navigate the internet, I have my keyboard and mouse, which allows me to do other unique things--like post back to you right now. Can you even view the reply box on the Xbox live internet? Can you even GO ON the Internet at all with it (Seriously, I don't know, but if you can...I doubt it)? If you're talking about internet play well that's just a load of crap. I haven't actually had any netlag for the last 4 years, since I got my cable modem. City of Heroes with thousands of people (HUNDREDS ONSCREEN AT ONCE), World of Warcraft with thousands of people in the same server, Planetside with thousands of people at once (ONSCREEN AND SHOOTING/DRIVING VEHICLES)...never had a lag problem. I set up my PS2's online and I got unplayable stupid lag on every different setup I used. I never even bothered with the Xbox because only Halo is worth playing multiplayer on it and as a PC person I can't stomach playing with ONLY 32 people maximum. The same way I can't stomach dying because a guy got behind me and unloaded his gun into my back but the control scheme doesn't allow me to turn around any faster than the speed of a cripple in a wheelchair with a missing wheel.There's no argument here--the PC is and always will be better at the internet play than consoles. If you think playing laggy games with a handful of people on a big goofy control scheme while they scream in your earpiece is 'better' than PC online gaming, you obviously haven't had much experience with the PC.
The PC can do all of those things.
I can emulate what doesn't get officially released. Play it with whatever controller I want, whatever controls I want, and be able to save anywhere...plus have better graphics in some cases.
I don't think I even have to answer this. You can't make a movie with your Xbox. You can't record your band with it, either. Hell, you can't even do your homework on it. Call me when you guys get Wordpad and MS Paint and I'll rethink my point.
Look at a 60hz 800x600 monitor for ten minutes. Your eyes will water and sting and your head will start to pound if you look at it long enough. Now look at a 120hz flatpanel CRT with 1280x1024 resolution. I stare at one all day at work and I don't wear glasses yet.
Actually, I can. They cost less, look better, play better, and have a way longer enjoyability than any console game I've ever played (except for sports games, really). Not including mods or multiplayer, of course.
1.) The fact you are unwilling to learn how to maintain a PC or are unwilling to pay the price for one is not a weakness. The PC as a machine has no weakness versus the consoles. A PC game can be any size they want, it can use all the latest technologies, it can easily implement fully functional multiplayer, in some cases it spawns a whole line of brilliant and interesting modifications, it can support vastly more players, it doesn't require a proprietary network to access its internet support, it supports any type of input device ever created, and has vastly superior capability in all technological points of interest. Graphics, sound, video--it crushes any console. EASILY.

I wouldn't call me a fool, either. Like I said, I own consoles, always have. I own a PC too. If anyone is ignoring the virtues of the other side of the fence, it's you. To me the consoles have their niche, that much is undeniable. Third person action games are the console's, right now, as are sports games. But what most people fail to see, as I see, is that these things exist only because the PC does not feel the need for them in its own libraries. If the PC devs decided to do something along any of those console niche games' lines, it would be better--of that I have absolutely no doubt (except, of course, with the wrestling game--but if I bought a controller, even that doubt would evaporate).
You know, ya waltz into my section and start shooting off these snippy one-line answers. 'Consoles own PCs.' Where are your facts? Where's your point, even? 'Consoles own PCs.' How? Do you have an explanation worth sharing or are you just so desperately attached to this notion that you can't help but repeat it despite the mounting evidence to the contrary?
No. I got my money's worth, out of a game I paid for. I too played dozens upon dozens of OTHER games during that time frame, of course--but my point still stands. There is a reason why EB and Gamestop don't have PC game 'trade in' sections. We're still playing these old games because they are great--and also, are constantly being upgraded. I also have something like 200 maps for War3, and it comes with the very map editor they used to make the single player campaigns. You've got...what? 16, in Halo 2? Heh.

How can you argue that enjoying a game for longer rathern than shorter amounts of time is a negative?
Actually, you owe any three dimensional polygon-based video games to one Mr. John Carmack, who was one of the first people to commercialize the use of 3d accelerator APIs to make game environments. Even if they hadn't been the ones to push it, the idea was floating around for a long time--Wolfenstein 3D and Doom made people see the great potential of a fully 3D environment. The consoles did not start to use polygons until many years after that point. They only started using actual graphics processors in the last generation of machines, I believe. Behind the technology of the day, always. Yes, they started at the same time, but the PC is an independent market that has pushed the technology of the industry in all kinds of new directions. The consoles only just got environment mapping. Environment mapping was made on Quake III. The time frame is the same, but you never see the consoles inventing a new technology. It ALL came from, or is partially derived from, the PC.
Well that's asinine. Most of those mods are created with tools provided by the developers with the game. They usually ARE made of the developers' content--ESF is a rare exception to that rule. Oh, did I welcome you to the ESF forum yet...?
Actually, YOU fail. If you have kids or are below the poverty line you shouldn't be pissed you can't afford a PC, and you damn sure shouldn't be going out and buying a playstation, either.
I run my life through my PC. I write books on my PC. I do my work on my PC. I pay bills with my PC. I play video games with my PC. I write, compose, and record music with my PC. I edit videos with my PC. I store my memories on here by way of saving hundreds of photos taken at family and friend-related events. I keep a journal on my PC. I use my PC to keep in contact with old friends and make new ones. I used my PC to buy my car, after using it to heavily research things. I use my PC to consolidate my school loans. I use my PC to check my minutes on my cell phone. I use my PC to learn how to cook things I don't know how to cook. I use my PC to order food when friends are over sometimes. I use my PC to keep up with the world around me. I used it to research medical problems when I had no health insurance. I used it to learn how to play some songs on guitar I could never figure out. I even used it to join a little-known mod's forum some years back, which puts us right where we are right now.

At the end of the day, my computer has...well, really, it's changed my life, in ways. Now how in the hell can you tell me it's not a worthwhile investment?
And pride=ownage.
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
2,462
Best answers
0
Kimfu said:
Surely you looked at the minimum system requirements? It's like buying a PS2 games for the PSX -_-


And good God! You haven't played stuff untill you were 8? :eek: I was 14 before I got my eager little teenager hands on a game.. -_-
Well I didn't even know what "nVidia" was =X

I mean I got my computer at 8, I've been playing console games since like, 3-4. But what I mean the majority of my life was console games.

But, if I were to focus my gaming on a computer, it would be unorthodox for me. Again, I don't play a lot of FPSs, so that doesn't appeal to me. The games that I like are targeted at consoles and are easier to use via controller. So the choice is preference, but if it's out of specifications, the PC probably wins.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,626
Best answers
0
I would have thought this argument over by now.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom