Consoles vs PC gameing thread.

[Codz]

So we don't derail the Skyrim discussion. I personally am multiplatform but most newer releases I buy for console.

 

[RisingFury]

PC or Laptop? What are you nuts?

Laptop for gaming is a joke.
Small screen, clumsy keyboard, limited hardware power, limited battery life (if you plug your laptop in and leave it plugged in, then it's better to get a PC).

 

[Ark]

Proud PC fanboy. Better hardware, better controls, and better modding potential. Consoles hold back software development by requiring everything to be compatible with the same hardware 6 years down the road. Consoles are limited to only running software that's been approved by Microsoft or Sony, and customization ability is essentially nothing. The console philosophy is "Do it our way or get lost".

The only reason to own consoles is because many of the best games are hoarded as console exclusives to get people to buy them. If all the games I wanted to play were available on PC, I would ditch my consoles and never look back.

And I agree with the above, laptop gaming is worthless for heat issues alone.

 

[FADEC]

Always PC. My last console was the first Playstation back in the 1990s. I don't see a sense in buying a console when I own a high-end PC which is upgraded frequently. No console in the world can do what my PC can do. Especially space and flight simulation. So in my case consoles are just dumb toys.

Laptop for gaming is a joke.

At home = yes. On vacation = no joke but useful. I wish I had a gaming laptop, so I wouldn't have to drag my big PC along when I visit my brother for a few days in December.

 

[Codz]

So in my case consoles are just dumb toys.

.

This is why many people think PC gamers are snobs and jerks.

 

[Linguofreak]

PC or Laptop? What are you nuts?

Laptop for gaming is a joke.
Small screen, clumsy keyboard, limited hardware power, limited battery life (if you plug your laptop in and leave it plugged in, then it's better to get a PC).

For really hardcore gaming, yeah, but I don't generally enjoy the genres that have the harshest hardware requirements. My 15-incher does quite well for my purposes.

As far as battery life, a laptop still has portability advantages over a desktop even if it's always plugged in when powered on. A laptop bag with a laptop in it is much easier to handle than a suitcase with a tower and monitor in it.

And I agree with the above, laptop gaming is worthless for heat issues alone.

This is *really* dependent on the laptop. My dad's machine has major heating issues, my own can run full-bore for at least several hours (if not indefinitely) without trouble.

 

[DanM]

The only games I play are Team Fortess 2, Orbiter, and FSX. So all of them would be PC. I happen to own a Wii, but almost never use it.

 

[Ark]

For really hardcore gaming, yeah, but I don't generally enjoy the genres that have the harshest hardware requirements. My 15-incher does quite well for my purposes.

As far as battery life, a laptop still has portability advantages over a desktop even if it's always plugged in when powered on. A laptop bag with a laptop in it is much easier to handle than a suitcase with a tower and monitor in it.



This is *really* dependent on the laptop. My dad's machine has major heating issues, my own can run full-bore for at least several hours (if not indefinitely) without trouble.

I'll admit, I've never owned a proper $2000 gaming laptop. But I remember playing the original Halo on an old HP laptop I used to have, and it would burn through a battery in half an hour and deep-fry your nuts while you do it. Laptops are as-is, with almost no upgrade potential. If it goes obsolete, you buy another one.

Personally, I like having a PC for serious work and gaming, and my Droid X for light portable duty. I can do almost anything with the Droid that I could do with a laptop, and it fits in my pocket. I'd like to pick up an Android tablet sometime in the future to make web surfing and such more enjoyable.

If I was in school and needed to type a lot or do a lot of real work away from home, a laptop would totally be worth it. But I can't justify buying one for gaming when desktops are far more suited for it.

 

[FADEC]

This is why many people think PC gamers are snobs and jerks.

Some people always get personal if there are no arguments. You just have to say that consoles (not the users) are dumb compared to the capabilities of good computers and soon somebody takes it as an insult.

 

[Linguofreak]

I'll admit, I've never owned a proper $2000 gaming laptop.

Neither have I. This machine set me back a bit less than $1k, and it's not only for gaming. It's quite sufficient for the gaming I do though.

But I remember playing the original Halo on an old HP laptop I used to have, and it would burn through a battery in half an hour and deep-fry your nuts while you do it.

I'm not sure if mine would last half an hour gaming on battery. I've never really tried it, but I know that the battery life started out short and has gotten shorter with battery age. I haven't run it on battery a lot since getting back from Germany.

Laptops are as-is, with almost no upgrade potential. If it goes obsolete, you buy another one.

The limited upgrade potential is a definite concern. I'm not feeling especially squeezed by this things performance yet, though, and I've had it two years. (Which isn't to say that the performance is great, just that it's never a show-stopper).

Personally, I like having a PC for serious work and gaming, and my Droid X for light portable duty. I can do almost anything with the Droid that I could do with a laptop, and it fits in my pocket. I'd like to pick up an Android tablet sometime in the future to make web surfing and such more enjoyable.

If I was in school and needed to type a lot or do a lot of real work away from home, a laptop would totally be worth it. But I can't justify buying one for gaming when desktops are far more suited for it.

Certainly not *only* for gaming. But even a fairly mid-ranged laptop can be a decent gaming machine when the other things you use it for make portability a concern.

 

[Codz]

Some people always get personal if there are no arguments. You just have to say that consoles (not the users) are dumb compared to the capabilities of good computers and soon somebody takes it as an insult.

If you insult what someone enjoys doing because you want to feel superior then yes, that is an insult.

 

[Unstung]

If you have the cash to put out for a good PC, go ahead. My budget desktop was worth as much as a PS3 is these days yet can't play as many games well. That means this and a PS3 are about $600 USD. Also, there are many games that are exclusive to consoles.

If new downloadable games were significantly cheaper (e.g. on Steam), that would be more worth it. Steam has so many enticing sales, but I don't see why new releases are so expensive for downloads. The PS3 lacks hard drive space, using a laptop-sized one, and I don't think the Slim version is upgradeable so you'd run out of space real fast on that set-up. Not to mention the PS3 still has to install most games which is annoying and still eats up the entire disk on the PS3.

Computers die (of course), and PCs could have much important data and be much more expensive than a console nowadays. Consoles nonetheless will last for many years without the requirement to upgrade; the PS3 has been going strong since 2006. Backing up to the Skyrim thread, having too many add-ons and modifications eventually make me get bored with any game (even Orbiter) and re-install the entire thing clean. So many additions feels like cheating and is an overload, straying too far from the original game.

That being said, there are games that are far superior on the PC and some of them I can handle. Overall, most of my modern games are on the console but consoles are beat in simulation games (from SimCity to Orbiter).

 

[Codz]

If you have the cash to put out for a good PC, go ahead. My budget desktop was worth as much as a PS3 is these days yet can't play as many games well. That means this and a PS3 are about $600 USD. Also, there are many games that are exclusive to consoles.

If new downloadable games were significantly cheaper (e.g. on Steam), that would be more worth it. Steam has so many enticing sales, but I don't see why new releases are so expensive for downloads. The PS3 lacks hard drive space, using a laptop-sized one, and I don't think the Slim version is upgradeable so you'd run out of space real fast on that set-up. Not to mention the PS3 still has to install most games which is annoying and still eats up the entire disk on the PS3.

Computers die (of course), and PCs could have much important data and be much more expensive than a console nowadays. Consoles nonetheless will last for many years without the requirement to upgrade; the PS3 has been going strong since 2006. Backing up to the Skyrim thread, having too many add-ons and modifications eventually make me get bored with any game (even Orbiter) and re-install the entire thing clean. So many additions feels like cheating and is an overload, straying too far from the original game.

That being said, there are games that are far superior on the PC and some of them I can handle. Overall, most of my modern games are on the console but consoles are beat in simulation games (from SimCity to Orbiter).

Perfectly said.

 

[FADEC]

If you insult what someone enjoys doing because you want to feel superior then yes, that is an insult.

Depends on the point of view. More capabilities do make a PC superior to a console in my point of view. In case somebody identifies itself with a technology too much, he/she might feel superior/insulted.

 

[Pyromaniac605]

I do most of my gaming on PC, although I do own all three consoles just in case any particularly good exclusives come out.

PCs have and always will be far superior to consoles due to their upgrade capability, consoles may be state-of-the-art when they released (Although, honestly they're usually a little below that) but they become outdated very quickly.

Anyone who uses the excuse that gaming with a PC is too expensive should probably find a cheaper hobby, as I can't see why you wouldn't be willing to pay money to get the best out of your hobby. Not to mention the hypocrisy in paying $15 a month for Xbox LIVE yet a couple of hundred dollars every year or so is "too expensive."

If anything, console gamers are only playing their consoles for two things, the exclusives and the controllers, too bad they don't realise that they can use controllers on PCs with a little effort.

 

[Unstung]

The only things I've paid for exclusively on the PS3 are games, honestly, and one controller since 2008 (plus a $50 harddrive as I slowly run out of space).

It's ironic that my computer is a budget one because I run really intensive things on it from Lightroom to Vegas and it probably hinders the quality of some things I produce. It's often an effort to suck out every possible frame per second, but not really for gaming purposes. This is why I upgraded it a bit but I'm now running out of space on this system.

If consoles go out of date so quickly, I wonder why so many similar games are being released on them and the PC. The PC has less exclusives than consoles. You can max out your system and expose it by agreeing to EA's new EULA for slightly better graphics and a 64-player online mode, for example.

 

[Codz]

I do most of my gaming on PC, although I do own all three consoles just in case any particularly good exclusives come out.

PCs have and always will be far superior to consoles due to their upgrade capability, consoles may be state-of-the-art when they released (Although, honestly they're usually a little below that) but they become outdated very quickly.

Anyone who uses the excuse that gaming with a PC is too expensive should probably find a cheaper hobby, as I can't see why you wouldn't be willing to pay money to get the best out of your hobby. Not to mention the hypocrisy in paying $15 a month for Xbox LIVE yet a couple of hundred dollars every year or so is "too expensive."

If anything, console gamers are only playing their consoles for two things, the exclusives and the controllers, too bad they don't realise that they can use controllers on PCs with a little effort.

I play on PC and I absolutely can't stand PC snobs. Did you ever begin to think that some people don't have the disposable income to upgrade PC's?

 

[Unstung]

I play on PC and I absolutely can't stand PC snobs. Did you ever begin to think that some people don't have the disposable income to upgrade PC's?

According to this poll, I'm 'multiplatform'. Team Fortress 2 sure is fun on PC. If you can afford or it have it has great utility, go ahead with a PC. If I maintained a superb system, I'd ditch consoles. It would even make some daily use less aggravating.

But what can I say? I've racked up over $1000 in photography equipment over the past few years. But I plan to do that for a while and some things are really long-term investments. That's my expensive hobby.

 

[Cras]

I am a bit of an idiot when it comes to gaming. I built a massive PC for video editing and FSX, and yet never use it for other games (other than Orbiter and SSMS). After having so many headaches with Xbox360 this past year, I have finally got wise and am planning on getting Skyrim for PC, and will probably get the new Assassins Creed for PC as well.

As for the other two games that I am eagerly waiting for release, Uncharted 3 is PS3 only, so choice is made for me there, and I am stuck with XBox 360 for Mass Effect 3, since that is where my saved player is back from Mass Effect 1.

 

[Pyromaniac605]

I play on PC and I absolutely can't stand PC snobs. Did you ever begin to think that some people don't have the disposable income to upgrade PC's?

If you don't have enough money, fair enough, but if you do, but you spend it on Xbox LIVE because PC upgrades are (Supposedly) too expensive, you're just being a hypocrite.