So Ive been thinking about buying one of these consoles for the past couple days and I wanted to hear your opinions about which one is better? I dont know much about video games so I would appreciate some help, thanks.
Printable View
So Ive been thinking about buying one of these consoles for the past couple days and I wanted to hear your opinions about which one is better? I dont know much about video games so I would appreciate some help, thanks.
I have three XBox 360s. They are all broken. They are all one year old, each.
I have one PS3. It is not broken. It is three years old.
PS3 simple as that
Depends on what you want. Do you want to buy a separate blu ray player? Do you mind having low quality connections for online gaming? Do you only watch copy written movies? Do you own a PSP? Get a PS3. If you're not looking for those things, and want a cheaper system, with a better online experience, then get a Xbox. The 360 has a better warranty if it breaks than the PS3 which is a plus, and I think graphically it's a tad bit better because it's easier to program for. You also want to check out which community plays which game more. For instance....360 has a larger mortal kombat population, while ps3 has a larger street fighter population.
I've owned both systems, and personally I like the PS3 better because of the free online play, the controller, blu ray, and there really aren't any ground breaking first party games that would sway me in either direction. The price tag of the 360 is hard to beat though....so if it's a money thing, I would defiantly go for the 360.
I have played both and just like Auron says it depends on what you like. I eventually chose the 360 because I don't mind paying for online and I love halo.
This is what I needed to know. The 360 sounds appealing because its so cheap but if it breaks easily then forget it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sloth
Hmmm I dont really know what I want or what games I like but free online play sounds great. I have a Ps2 that I got like ten years ago and it still works so it sounds like Sony makes decent consoles. Money is not really an issue I just want a system that Im not going to have to replace after a year. I was leaning towards a Ps3 before I made this thread and so far it sounds like a better system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auron
I have had one xbox for over a year and never had a problem with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by stormcrow
That's the thing about me man...I haven't really enjoyed that many exclusives to where they would dictate what system I would get in a long time. The last system I bought solely for it's exclusive was the PS2 when I found out Squaresoft was going to be making games for them. This generation, the deciding factor was price. I waited for both systems to have a price drop, and hopped on a 360 first. If I could do It all again, I probably would have bought one of the backwards compatible PS3s and skipped the 360 entirely....or bought a 360 that actually came with a warranty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zebrah
I guess I didn't take this into account, Squarenix makes games exclusively for Sony right? If thats the case that would be one deciding factor for me, I literally grew up on final fantasy(nice avatar btw) and am hoping to play the new FF games that just came out. Final Fantasy trumps everything for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auron
I've had my xbox 360 for 3 years and I've never had a problem with it.
I personally chose it over ps3 because I like gears of war and Halo (which are exclusive to xbox). Other than that I don't really see the difference. I'm not a big gamer, so all the technical stuff doesn't mean anything to me.
FF XIII came out for both systems, and I'm guessing FF XIII-2 will too. Final Fantasy XIII Versus is supposed to be a PS3 exclusive though.Quote:
Originally Posted by stormcrow
Get a PC.
He probably has one that required a new graphics card and memory upgrade two months after buying it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Ironically, my PS3 broke just right after the one-year warranty ran out.
PS3 is a more stable, reliable system... in most cases.
Also the online service isn't "slow" or laggy just because it's free. it depends on your connection, other peoples' connections, dedicated servers or not.. I've seen just as much lag on both consoles, though 360 has cross game chat and the unified party system, which are pluses.
Right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auron
Microsoft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zebrah
I've had a 360 since early 2006 and never had a problem with it but then again I rarely ever played it.
No matter what you get, you'll be stuck with a console.
I'm totally with Marvo on this. Just get a good PC that will be up to date enough to play games.
Editing games on a console is impossible.
Tweaking games on a console is impossible.
Modding games on a console is impossible.
Turning around, in a first person game, in enough time to avoid getting shot twenty-eleven times, on a console, is impossible.
Defeating anyone who is on a PC in a deathmatch game is impossible.
The appeal of consoles is that it does not take brains to use them. You just mash buttons until the game goes. In fact, it doesn't matter which button you push. They all make it go.
If you have a brain, however, PC is the way to go.
Sure, there are errors and device conflicts and whatnot. I have a brain with which to correct these issues.
Xbox, I've had mine for over a year and I've had no problems
PS3 is better quality, but you can use HDMI
PS3 was hacked not long ago :P remember
Buy a Nintendo WiiU when it comes out.
Depends on what you want. I have a PS3, shared with my brother. He used it for about a year, but wanted to play COD with his friends who are all on Xbox. So he bought an Xbox. I never play online though, so i'm very happy with a PS3.
I would go with PS3, I just find the controller to be way easier to handle, and I generally like the game selection better.
First of all, twenty-eleven isn't a real number, second of all when I play online, I'm only playing against people playing on the same console as me.Quote:
Originally Posted by sloth
What are you talking about, are you saying that PC users are doing more than just pushing buttons (keys)? And I'm pretty sure it does matter which ones you press, not that most games require any kind of intelligence in the first place, including PC games.Quote:
The appeal of consoles is that it does not take brains to use them. You just mash buttons until the game goes. In fact, it doesn't matter which button you push. They all make it go.
Thanks everyone. I don't really know what to get now though.
Buy a Gamecube. They come in purple and black.
Buy a PC. They are better than any console.
Because they have to be replaced in 2 years after spending 2k opposed to 5 years at the fraction of the price?Quote:
Originally Posted by sloth
A 2k computer would last you 6-7 years probably, assuming you don't break it. I've had my current computer, which I got at $1200 (insane prices in Denmark compared to the US) a little less than 4 years ago. I think it could easily last me another year, unless I really want to play the new games on high settings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auron
Still a fraction of the price. If i bought a PS3 on day one, it would have lasted me until now, and I would have only spent 500 bucks. Xbox 360.....400 bucks. That means I have 700 to 800 bucks left to spend on games if we spent the same amount of money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Years ago, people made games with the PC in mind first, but that's changing. PC's are now getting the crappy ports instead.
Doesn't change the fact that gaming on a PC is better in every single way. If all you want is console level graphics at 30 FPS and 480p/720p resolution, then you can probably get a PC at a price similar to the consoles at launch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auron
And there are still tons of great games on PC. Most ports turn out better on PC, and on PC you can also play RTS and MMORPG. On top of that you have the modding community, indie games, open source and I guess everything else the PC does that consoles do not.
In some ways, sure. Being able to mod games, and the generally far greater levels of customisation you get on the PC are great. Certain games also work far better with a mouse+keyboard. And the games themselves can look superb with the right hardware.Quote:
Doesn't change the fact that gaming on a PC is better in every single way. If all you want is console level graphics at 30 FPS and 480p/720p resolution, then you can probably get a PC at a price similar to the consoles at launch.
On the downside, there's the upkeep of the hardware, and a much greater chance of conflicts and errors, both hardware and software. And PC gaming isn't something you can invite a friend or two over to play a few games, which happen to be some of my fondest memories of gaming. There also does seem to be an increasing trend of sloppily porting games to the PC, though this goes both ways of course.
And for the record, I have both a very powerful gaming laptop and a 360. Given the sheer amount of use I have for such a powerful machine, whether that be my own work, video encoding, audio editing, emulating older console games, and gaming, I definitely don't regret the purchase.
As for consoles, I prefer the 360 over the PS3, but that's mostly a personal preference. The reliability of early 360 models was pretty poor, but that's more or less been eliminated by now.
Xbox Live doesn't offer much over the Playstation Network now, as Sony have caught up a lot on the features list, and having to pay to use my own bandwidth instead of playing on dedicated servers is something I resent. Though it didn't get taken down for a month and the databases stolen because the company running it is incompetent at security either.
You're joking right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturos
360 controller is at least 100 times better.
PS3 controller is too small and uncomfortable. Your thumbs also slip off the joysticks all the time coz they're shit.
360 if you're going console, but don't go console.
PC is the ONLY way to go if you have even the slightest bit of care about how you play the game.
Controls are much MUCH better
Graphics are better, how much depends on how good your computer is.
Gameplay is smoother, 30FPS vs (insertwhatever Hz your screen is here) FPS
In game communitites exist
And online gaming is completely free.
Modding and tweaking games exist
Much wider library of games
Not to mention that games are much much cheaper most of the time. Steam sales, for example, have made my collection of games about 600 dollars worth, only cost me about 80 dollars.
If you don't feel like buying a new PC, you could simply get a cheap 200 dollar GPU now and install it in your PC, and instantly beat any console to the ground a million times. You could still technically do that with a 100 dollar GPU but 200 dollar ones are more like it.
I've had the same xbox 360 for 4 years and have had 2 fatal errors with it ("fatal" meaning I had to send it back to M$). They come with 3 year warranties on RRoD's and 1 year on everything else, though, and to be fair, the online isn't bad. Games are expensive, though. Same for all consoles I guess.
One upside of PCs. When they get broke, which is much less often than consoles if you keep proper care of them, you can fix them instead of waiting 3 months while M$ fixes the issue, or being forced to buy a new one.
It took Microsoft a week total to collect my 360 from the UK, ship it off to Germany for repair, and get it back to me. There's no need to lie or make stuff up to make your case for PC gaming.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
And so what if you have to buy a brand new console if it's out of warranty? It's no different to having to buy new graphics cards if they break, and the cost would be similar. It's not like I lose anything by buying a new console either, because I can continue to use the old hard drive, and transfer my content (and the licenses) to the new one.
Sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Photolysis
The flipside of my earlier post is that if you do not care for your PC, it will be much more prone to breaking than any console.
I know several total non-gamers who picked up PS3s as the hub of their small home-theater systems and couldn't be happier, despite using them maybe 3 hours per month for their supposed primary function. If you see any use for the Blu-Ray/DVD functionality, and especially if you have a bunch of PS2 games, it's a no brainer. Unlike the PS2, which was a terrible DVD player, the PS3 is one of the best Blu-Ray players on the market.
Hmm this is very true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taosaur
I've got a dedicated blu ray player and a PS3. The PS3 is much better. Less loading times, mainly. The dedicated player takes ages to load up the movie.
One other point about PC gaming, is the scourge that is modern DRM. At least when I buy a physical game disc for my console of choice, I own a copy of the game. It's mine. I can resell it, and I can play it without having to get a publisher's permission. And I don't have to worry about rootkits wrecking my OS, or having the publisher ban me from my own game because I said something to piss them off.
Sure, you could just download cracked copies, but anyone with any knowledge of computers would tell you why that's a bad idea.
Yet, all these downsides are overshadowed by the glorious experience that gaming on the PC is compared to the consoles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Photolysis
I mean, really. Say how the small annoyance of a simple DRM can be worth giving up the superior immersion and control of the game that PC provides?
Big whoop, I have to login to GFWL after starting up dirt 3. That takes roughly 3 seconds. And for the whole 3 hours I play the game, I get to experience graphics unlike any console could produce in the modern world, and am free to use any controller I desire.
I've only had DRM issues with a single game, and that was actually just some DLC. Games For Windows Live basically ruins all games it touches, so it's being phased out anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Photolysis
I disagree with it ruining games. It doesn't bother me in dirt games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
However, it's still a very minor nuisance which should be gotten rid of. And the PC community always complains about DRM, so it shouldn't last long.
You should never have to login for an offline game. Not everyone has an always-on connection, or reliable internet. If I go away and take my laptop with me, I shouldn't be locked out of software I've purchased because I can't get online (with the obvious exception of MMORPGs, which don't need DRM because they can constantly validate things anyway). I shouldn't have to worry about how many times I can reinstall my software before running afoul of product activations.Quote:
Big whoop, I have to login to GFWL after starting up dirt 3.
Even if you personally don't mind it, or it doesn't affect you, you should still object to it on principle because it's needlessly invasive and limiting. And it doesn't stop piracy anyway.
I doubt very much it'll be removed, no matter how pointless it is. It's the entertainment industry's "War on Drugs".Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
I've generally been fortunate in that regard, but when I buy PC games I'll always investigate the kinds of DRM on there. But there are major releases out there that are/were seriously bad for one's machine and/or extremely restricting. Spore's a good example.Quote:
I've only had DRM issues with a single game, and that was actually just some DLC
I'm definitely more of a PC gamer, but some games do work better on consoles, particularly any game that more than one person in the room will be playing. I particularly like martial arts fight games on consoles. Some adventure/RPG games work better on consoles, too--often because of having been ported badly to the PC, but still. A PC is something that, most likely, you're going to have anyway, and games won't be the only consideration in what kind of system you want. IMO, the decision to buy a console is a separate matter entirely.
I think Sony is the one pushing DRM the most. Unless you buy Windows Live games or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Photolysis
With downloaded games, I think you should be able to sell the serial code to someone else at a lower price. But they aren't going to let you do that because they make more money if you can't.
Oh yeah, also the bluray player is good in the PS3. The separate bluray players you buy are horrible. We got one that you HAVE to connect to the internet otherwise you can't play any movies. Seriously WTF?
It streams 1080p trailers and shit like that every time you watch it, which can take a long time if the internet isn't going so well.
It's just ridiculous. So yeah, if you want a good bluray player you should get the PS3 anyway. Although the drive is supposed to fail after 200 hours (mine still hasn't though).
Ps3 has a lot more games (for me) that are good rather than Xbox, which has like 3 or 4 games i want to play, and i dont even want to play them that much. I have a lot of games (mostly by doing that 'hack your friend tech and download it off of them' they allow me tho) and there are still a BUNCH of games i want to play that i havent
Infamous 2
Uncharted 3 (not released)
SoTC and Ico collection (not released)
Last Gaurdian (not released)
Dark Souls (not released)
Mass Effect 2 (on Xbox as well)
and some other games i cant seem to remember, and these are just the games i dont have, i have a lot more, again, mostly by doing the hacking thing with my friends permission :D
but of course, if you want shooters only im not the guy to listen to :D
I have a gamecube XDQuote:
Originally Posted by GavinGill
and 26 games on it, but i sold about half of em to get this sadly unpopular game called Valkyria Chronicles. Its sick :lol:
Any 360 you buy nowadays will be fine. The first generation 360s had the RROD problem but that was basically gone when the elite console came out and is completely eradicated in the new slimline version.Quote:
Originally Posted by stormcrow
All the scaremongering about RRODs that goes on is just that. It's like someone in three years going "You shouldn't buy a PS3, remember the time Sony messed up, gave away all their subscriber details and turned the PSN off for three months?"
EDIT: Also, regardless of which console you get, spend the $10 or so on Castle Crashers from XBL Arcade or... Playstation... Live Arcade(?) and play through the campaign in local coop with three friends.
Honestly that was the most fun I've ever had with a game.
I didn't realize we were arguing PC vs console, but yeah. I'm a PC gamer, and everything this man said I back up 100%^Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
The bulk of my argument is basically:
Everything consoles do, the PC can do better, and then there's a lot of stuff PC does that consoles don't. This comes at a price of course, but if you spend large amounts of time playing games or just using computers, you might aswell put a lot of money into it.
The only real advantage consoles have, apart from being cheap, is the exclusive games, and even that is becoming irellevant.
I Prefer The PS3 Controller Its light + It has sixaxis
Xbox controllers need batteries... one clear disadvantage...
PC is compatible with all control schemes.
But again, if you're even considering a current-gen console, you probably already have a PC, and probably one capable of playing at least most fairly recent games. I'm reasonably confident that stormcrow has a PC and at least occasionally plays games on it. Buying a console is a separate decision entirely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Consoles are also inherently more social. When was the last time you saw four people doing anything simultaneously on a single PC?
Uh, so do wireless keyboards and mice. And you can get wired controllers too, or use rechargeable batteries.Quote:
Originally Posted by dajo
That.Quote:
Originally Posted by Photolysis
Besides, I was gonna comment on his post saying that IMO, having to recharge controllers the way you have to on the PS3 is more annoying than using batteries.
For my 360, I have a charger and two batteries. Whenever I'm playing I'll leave one charging, so I have about 10 seconds of downtime whilst switching the batteries when needed, and I get the freedom of movement without having to worry about pulling cables out and so on. And it saves me having to spend the GDP of a small county on batteries.
I have frequent get-togethers with my friends, where we bring our computers and play all kinds of games. Also had a bunch of LAN parties with my clan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taosaur
Some PC games can do splitscreen, but it's just so rare, because people play online instead, or bring their computer a long, when visiting friends.
Yeah. Two major releases that support splitscreen are L4D2 and dirt 3. I know of no others.
But, that does not make PC gaming less social. I play a lot more with my friends online than console gaming friends could play on splitscreen, and if one really wants to game in the same room, a LAN party is a viable option
Guitar Hero/Rockband Series, COD, Halo, Gears of War series, Gran Turismo, Need for Speed, Sports Games, and then the fighters like MK, Tekken, Street Fighter II, and Dead or alive, that simply don't require it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
No one in my generation ever wants to hear "hey bring your computer over for a quick game of madden". Believe it or not, there are a lot of people who still think computers are just for downloading songs and homework.
On the PC I meant. Those are the only two PC games that I know to have SSQuote:
Originally Posted by Auron
It doesn't matter if people have a stereotypical view of what a computer does. I made 3 of my closest friends go from console to PC, and they are happy that they did. It's a whole nother experience than the one you get on the console.
Where I live, people never do splitscreen anymore anyways. It's all "Hey come online on PSN later tonite and lets play BLACKK OOOPSSS". Yeah... As if one couldn't do that on a PC anyways.
But if you really want splitscreen, it's one upside of consoles.
Sorry about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
You'd probably make a good salesman. Speaking of which...the highest selling console happens to be the cheapest. It's proof that the vast majority don't care about graphics. They'll sacrifice that in order to get the best bang for their buck, which means you have an uphill battle when it comes to converting the masses. And speaking of bucks...people on consoles are WAY more likely to actually buy games vs pirating them.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
But this is not the masses we're trying to sway here, only the OP of this threadQuote:
Originally Posted by Auron
Sure, consoles are kind of cheaper, if you don't know how to budget. I originally had a semi decent dual core in my PC, and when I started PC gaming, I picked up an ATi 5770, which was a cheap GPU at 139€ for me. That made my PC play pretty much every game out there well aside from two or three that were console ports that required a quad core to run, such as GTA IV. That was cheaper than buying a console would've been, and I think I got a better result IMO
Now I've spent more money on my PC and there's no game I can't run at max smoothly aside from crysis 1 and metro 2033 and whitcher 2 (though I can lower the graphics in all of these to make them run). And I've still only spent 350€, even though I got some expensive stuff here. I just used some great opportunities to get cheap but decent hardware.
PC gaming does not have to be more expensive. And not to even mention the game prices themselves. On consoles, game prices decline veeery slowly, while on the PC, services such as steam provide occasional sales that put the price down to something very low (5-15€ is a common price during a sale, on a 40€ game), and on top of that, the game prices decline much faster from my experience. That's another point where you save money on the PC.
Though you will most likely spend more money if you are going PC. It's just that it's possible to make a gaming PC with less money than a console would cost, and maintain that hobby with less money than on consoles.
Pirating here is not relevant, don't know why you brought that up. Happens on all platforms, though more common on the PC. Yes.
Pirating is part of the reason why PC games hit rock bottom so fast. It's also the reason why they get low sales. It's also the reason why I can't resale my game if I'm done with it. Console games cost more, but they actually have resale value which makes up for the price tag. I can also rent console games. PC games have the same resale value of underwear. Once you buy them, they're yours, and that's it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
How many orders of magnitude more often do you think someone picks up a controller with a friend or two vs. someone going to a LAN party? Three-ish? Yeah, I'm gonna go with about a thousand times more often. As for playing online, it's something all current systems can do, and it's still less social than being in the same room with other humans.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
But PC gaming is still leagues better than any other gaming platform.
Funny how that works, huh?
While it is true that piracy happens more often on PC, a lot of your statements are incorrect. It has been proven a lot of times, that good games sell, bad games are pirated. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is a good example of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auron
About the whole reselling thing, publishers have actually said, that the reason they're putting anti-resale restrictions on their games, is because they don't want people to resell them. Publishers know by now, that stopping piracy is impossible. It can't be done. You can only prevent people from using the online features, which is what they do. But they can still easily prevent reselling. So they do that instead.
And they will do exactly the same on consoles eventually. It has already begun with initiatives like Steamworks.
After how many patches right out of the box?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
And this has almost no effect on the current plethora of games that are available for the PS3. We can still get online with used games, and the only thing that may be missing is a few weapons, or bonus character which can be purchased on their market. The PSP Go got discontinued because console gamers still want physical games. Until really good broadband becomes a standard in all areas, it's going to be that much harder to do. If the current or next generation completely gets rid of physical, reusable products they know they'll lose a lot of customers. But we should be discussing the present.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
I was just comparing Xbox Controller with PS3 Controller..Quote:
Originally Posted by Photolysis
How?Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
granted the cable is quite short, but you can play while charging and don't waste all those batteries.
(ok, you can recharge 'em, but still)
"My preferences are empirically superior to other people's preferences. Everyone else is just stupid."Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Well I can only report anecdotal evidence, but nearly all people I've ever spoken to agree, that PC is the best platform.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taosaur
And from what I see, the ones that dont' agree aren't actually aware of what kind of a gaming platform the PC actually is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Well, I have an Xbox 360 and I've gone through 2 in 4 1/2 years. Xbox definitely has the best online experience, but without a doubt PS3 is a must if your a big RPG fan; simply because all of the Japanese devs have signed on with it. I enjoy the Xbox more because, even though their only sole title is Halo, all of the great games transfer to it. Basically, it boils down to: do you want to pay $60 a year for internet, and have an awesome time? Or do you want it for free, with a Blu-Ray player and have a not-as-awesome-time? (Playstation Home)
The PC with all it's bells and whistles still wont allow me to play certain games just because they've never came out for that system. Madden 11, Ridge Racer Series, Kingdom Hearts, Gran Toursimo series, most fighters made by Capcom and Namco such as Tekken and the Vs. Series, hell Forza never came out on the PC...what's up with that? Now when it comes to the PC, the only games I wish that came out for consoles are the Diablo and Warcraft series.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
I don't care how many frames per second a PC is pushing if it's not running the games I want to play.
I guess that's the difference between you and I. You want casual games. Nobody on PC really wants to play those games you mentioned, safe maybe Kingdom Hearts. Racers and fighters are fun, but they are probably the two genres that actually seem to work better on consoles than PC.
How would racing games work better? On PCs, they run better, look better, and have more controller choices, such as a wider variety of steering wheelsQuote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Madden and Gran toursimo are Sports Simulations in their own rights. There's nothing casual about them, and the fighters I've mentioned are far from button mashers. Just because I'm not playing a glorified version of rock paper scissors doesn't make it casual.
What I really meant is that those games mostly appeal to the casual gamer. Indeed, they are not actual casual games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
:facepalm: The point is, you're creating a competition where there is none. No one gets a console to play PC games, or vice versa. I also prefer PC games overall, and haven't actually owned a console since the original NES, but when I do play on consoles, I play games that I wouldn't be playing on the PC, and I do it while actually (not virtually) hanging out with other people.Quote:
Originally Posted by JussiKala
The fact that you aren't interested in console gaming does not invalidate another person's use for a console. The insistence that "there can be only one" just demonstrates that your identity is far too wrapped up in things you own.
That's quite an astute observation of JussiKala there Tao.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taosaur
Couldn't have said it better myself.
This is becoming sort of a problem with consoles as well, now games can be patched, instead of having to remaster the disc and get that into the supply chain like in previous generations. Certainly I've noticed an increasing trend of day 1 patches.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auron
Plenty seem to fall into this. At the end of the day PCs and consoles are both good for gaming, and they both have their own strengths and weaknesses. A point which is very obvious to me, because I own both as I've previously said.Quote:
The fact that you aren't interested in console gaming does not invalidate another person's use for a console. The insistence that "there can be only one" just demonstrates that your identity is far too wrapped up in things you own.
There are good things and bad things about each of the platforms, and there's no objective winner. It's a subjective decision that each individual consumer has to make for themselves. Personally, I'll stick to both my PC and my Xbox 360, and I'll readily acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of both my own choices and those of competitors.
I never meant to say that consoles aren't a legitimate gaming platform. PC is simply superior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taosaur
I never meant that consoles wouldn't be a valid gaming platform. I just meant that aside from three main upsides which are: Ease of use (this is hardly an upside. If you can't properly install PC games, I doubt you'd browse forums like you're currently doing), splitscreen, and some exclusives, there's no way that the consoles beat a PC. You can still game on a console, sure, and I don't mind. Still doesn't change the fact that it's gonna be a superior experience on the PC.
I never even implied that "there can only be one." I simply stated that the PC results in a superior experience when gaming. That's it. I don't deny the validity of the consoles as a gaming platform.
What I commented there, on the ignorance of the people on the subject of gaming on the PC, is very noticeable. I know plenty of people who think PC gaming sucks, the graphics would be like CS 1.6 and that would be all PC gamers play, since the PC would't have any better games. I see this kind of ignorance everywhere in the console community where I live. Not to say that most console gamers are that, quite the opposite surely.
And haha? Me wrapped in the things I own? You don't know enough about me to make up a statement like that. A lot of what I own is not that great. I do not fool myself into thinking that it's great or anything. I acknowledge that a lot of my stuff is not great. I would never recommend that stuff to anyone because I know it would not be that good. And the only reason I'm keeping it is because I don't know enough about those subjects to yet make an educated decision on what to buy, and not waste my money. Stuff like that includes the audio side of my computer, for example. My headphones are somewhat crap. I acknowledge that and move on. I don't recommend them to anyone or say that they're the best.
As for stuff that I have that is good, I see clearly that there are other choices as well, however, the ones I made suit me the best. I don't deny that there are other choices. And most of the time, these other choices are clearly inferior in some ways and clearly superior in others. This is where I would really emphasize personal preference. If the other choices are mostly inferior, I emphasize personal preference less or none.
So you can just stop putting words in my mouth or acknowledge the fact that I actually realize what I'm saying and all that comes with it.
do none of you realize that this debate has been the same for 10+ years?
also - it's off topic