Why do people still care about PC vs. Console? I don't see the big deal. As long you're having fun, what does it matter what platform it's on?
PC Gaming is Cool And All... But...
- Thread starter Eggsnham
- Start date
I am not debating DX11 is an improvement (technically you can do all the same things with DX9 but DX11 is more efficient, therefore allowing better details without needing a supercomputer). I was just stating DX10 did close to nothing, and what it did do were pretty much ignored by developers.Xzi said:
This is the right mentality to have, I'd say.Ham_authority95 said:
I think the arguments still persist because there is still tons of misinformation being thrown around, so people rush in to correct these errors and suddenly get called "elitists" for doing so.
PC gaming seems to get the brunt of this misinformation, but console gaming gets its share as well.
well the way i see it anyone who says PC is best and is Superior are dumbass idiots
Anyone who says Consoles are best and is Superior are dumbass idiots
See if ya play it all like I do then you can enjoy it all without any lack of games
So in the end those who play anything and enjoy gaming for all its worth are the best and truly is superior end of story.
Anyone who says Consoles are best and is Superior are dumbass idiots
See if ya play it all like I do then you can enjoy it all without any lack of games
So in the end those who play anything and enjoy gaming for all its worth are the best and truly is superior end of story.
Well, if you have money invested in a platform and someone makes incorrect statements, you probably want to correct them. If you allow incorrect statements to propagate as truth (which it seems has happened with many people's view on PC gaming), then it can reduce the user base. That leads to fewer games and of course fewer people to play against in multi player.Ham_authority95 said:
You have pretty much the same issues on PC. Steam will only sell you the 'cut' version in Germany. DLC is often incompatible between different retailers. And which language a game supports is kind of a game of luck and information on that is often unreliable.teebeeohh said:
That is indeed a complete mess.
The problem with that level of fine tuning is that it would make it to easy to build configurations that result in playability issue. If you map X to fire and the game gives you a flamethrower that requires using the right stick and fire at the same time you have a problem, as you can't use both at once when fire is on X. You would also need to build the whole GUI flexible enough to adjust to the changed mapping and not display all the old default ones (something a lot of PC games fail at). Essentially fully input configuration would cause a whole lot of trouble, that would require quite a bit of effort to sort out in such a way that is acceptable for the experience that people expect from a console, thus you almost never see it outside of fighting games.
Tweaking on PC to me feels more like sadomasochism and I am really not into that kind of stuff =;-)
BUT i can just download a language packet on the PC, in most cases that is really easy, everything (not cut) on steam and every bioware game give you the easy option to download whatever language you like and avoiding the cut version on steam is as easy as buying a game from the UK and using that code for steam activation and at least i never had problems with DLC in that case, but i know other people who have so maybe i am just lucky.grumbel said:
and the GUI not displaying changed key mappings is one of the prime indicators for a cheap console port, together with clunky sticky aiming that works great with a controller but with a mouse feels like aiming a gun by poking the elephant it is strapped to.
Many reasons. If you want a psychological one, look up "cognitive dissonance", which is quite an interesting topic. Essentially having made a wrong decision (such as buying an expensive gamer PC ;-) leads people not to accept their mistake and correct it, but results in them searching for validation of their decision and paradoxically going even further down that route (i.e. they might classify themselves as "PC gamer" as its ok for a "PC gamer" to buy an expensive PC, while it might not seem Ok for just a casual gamer). This of course does not apply to all, but certainly quite a few taking part in those discussions.Ham_authority95 said:
Another reason is simply that the whole PC vs console stuff actually matters these days. It is no longer just about "us" vs "them", but about mainstream PC game development moving over to consoles and making the PC just a platform for ports. Essentially, PC gaming as it used to be is kind of dieing out and getting consolified along the way. So it's kind of self defense.
Agreed. In the long run not having XP compatibility may have been a wise move, but in this case the "long run" is DX11, it utterly crushed DX10. But in retrospect I think Microsoft actually expected all of this - I think one of the reasons DX10 wasn't a massive upgrade was because MS knew it wouldn't have widespread support. When the next XBox is announced chances are DX11 will be a prominent feature (if not in name, at least graphical capabilities).scott91575 said:
Sorry, no. That's not what I'm talking about. When I mentioned "older titles" I meant within the same console as my point was about software changes with the same hardware.scott91575 said:
Alright, I'll give you this one. I took a cheap shot at the OS without explaining what screwed the programs so much. When I changed my OS, I changed from a 32bit XP to a 64bit Vista. While there was a 64bit version for XP, it's use wasn't widespread enough at the time to cause an issue with too many people. When people began to adopt the 64bit systems (and Vista which to some people is the "worst OS Microsoft could have ever made". Win 2000/Win ME had similar complaints), many programs weren't able to communicate with the OS properly. So for the first year or so, there were quick fixes/hot-fixes/patches/updates until we got to the point where all the older programs have a 32bit emulation mode.
I just blamed the OS because that's when the issue came up for me.
Sorry, some of your points I didn't find relevant so I snipped them.
Just to be clear as it seems I've been forcefully thrown into the "consoles are better" camp, I favor no 'side' and my point in that quote was merely a reference to annoying issues I had when changing my OS that was never an issue in a console firmware update. It was never about having better backwards compatibility on consoles because that would be an absolutely retarded argument to make.jason27131 said:
I have both Xbox and PC.
I prefer the Xbox for the games it has, and the use of controllers, and the easy use of support.
What I mean is, you buy a game for Xbox and pop it in.
PC = Buying it, possibly waiting for it to download, waiting for it to install, attempting to play it, get angry that it doesn't work, read through online forums, try automatics patches, realize that the automatic patches didn't work, attempt to manually patch it, get angry that that doesn't solve the problem, try about 4 other methods described on forums, get it to kind of work, get sick of trying, and just be happy with a game that 80% works.
I prefer the Xbox for the games it has, and the use of controllers, and the easy use of support.
What I mean is, you buy a game for Xbox and pop it in.
PC = Buying it, possibly waiting for it to download, waiting for it to install, attempting to play it, get angry that it doesn't work, read through online forums, try automatics patches, realize that the automatic patches didn't work, attempt to manually patch it, get angry that that doesn't solve the problem, try about 4 other methods described on forums, get it to kind of work, get sick of trying, and just be happy with a game that 80% works.
Then there are the console gamers that try to justify what they truly know to be an inferior system by spreading propaganda as to why a console is better when none of the reasons truly are console exclusive and cant be done on a PC. Wich is usualy the people that start threads of PC V. console. example this thread.grumbel said:
What self defense? you mean when PC gamers complain about the outdated console hardware that is the very reason the ports are so crappy? Something that is a complaint for console gamers and not against them? You mean the legitimate complaints about ports having clunky controls that just shows poor design and we would like them to spend more than 1 shift setting up the controls? Yeah thats good.
Several of the posts on this thread, notably on this page address the issue of price. Specifically about how PC costs a lot and need to be upgraded. Another issues I've seen is about Mods on PC games. I've seen more then a few arguments that assert that PCs are better because of the mouse and keyboard which makes games like RTSs easier to control. Another person notes that PCs have more difficulty with getting games to run due to software and hardware differences. Another person asserts that PC games are better because they aren't limited by hardware i.e. you can change the hardware and improve your PC easily.zehydra said:
Just glaceing through some of these other posts there are a variety of arguments that extend beyond issue of games and ports. I think you can agree that people are thinking about more then just what developers are developing on.
PC's blow consoles out the water everybody knows that for a fact. If you know what upgrades you need for your PC needs you make can be high end for 10 years with only the need for minor updates every now and then. Yet if you're one of those dumbass graphics whore that overclock your system just to see every detail then you're the reason why PC gaming look bad. You make it seem like we upgrade our PC's all the time and spend countless amounts of cash to get that uber look. Most smart PC owners don't even max out the graphics they care is for a smoothly running game that doesn't crash and their rig not overheating. I for once like PC gaming because I'm able to use a controller that I'm comfortable with on as many games that my rig can handle.
Wow, I have both and I must say your statement is incredibly incorrect. If you are at 80%, I am pretty sure that is user error. In the last 4 years I can only think of one game I had trouble getting to work correctly, and I have 40+ PC games. As for patches, yeah, PC has them. So does XBox.RadioactiveMicrobe said:
As for buying a game, tell you what. You order a console game online and I will order a PC game. I bet I am playing the game about 3 days before you. If you go to a store you will probably pay more. I think I can wait the 1 hour (8 hours for a slow connection) to download a game in order to save money. Of course it takes time for people to get to a store, buy the game, and return (plus the cost of gas). On top of that, for new releases download services often have pre downloads. So there is almost no wait to play a game as soon as it launches. Way faster than having to wait in line for some midnight release.
As for installing a game, it makes load times twice as fast as a console and ten times faster if you have a SSD drive. The overall wait time in game while playing a console with be much, much longer than the time it takes to install. I laugh when I hear console players complain about load times in games when it only takes a few seconds for me.
well, yes, they are. But you have to understand that having better/different controls or the cost of either isn't a big enough issue to fuel the discussion itself. The (unsaid) argument has become this, "which is better?". What you have described are responses to the question "which is better", not reasons for asking, "which is better".Twilight_guy said:
PC gamers are getting annoyed that they're getting ignored by the Dev community, and have taken to the forums to explain why they shouldn't get ignored (because they're better).
There is more to it, obviously than just that, such as what you suggested, (the whole batman vs superman thing). Some people just like to try to prove that what they use is superior to what another person uses. But I'm not convinced that that alone is enough to fuel an internet-wide feud.
I always try to be as unbiased and neutral as possible, despite my preference for PC gaming.
I can see your points, as I've already considered them myself and they're valid points too, buying a piece of hardware that you rarely need to update every few years and all that. Also, as a PC gamer, I play a lot of PC games using my Xbox 360 controller. It's not a matter of wich one is better, it's a matter of wich one I'd like to use at that moment (also, rarely, because it's the better option).
But also, there's the "cost" factor, wich I already went through and I realised that, despite it's pecularities, PC gaming is a lot more cheaper than console gaming. Let's say you buy and Xbox 360 right now. If you want the better deal, you need to get an Elite edition, because of it's wireless capabilities and the amount of memory inside the harddrive, wich is becoming more and more important in consoles over time.
If you buy a Core console, you're pretty much screwed, because, if you're lucky, you'll get a decent amount of harddrive space, but not enough. Also, it doesn't come with wireless conectivity out of the box, making you buy an insanely expensive peripherial, same with the outlandish prices Microsoft has with their harddrives.
Also, there's the Xbox Live factor, one that, as a long time PC gamer, saw a barebones functionality compared to what I already had for almost a decade before. And I'm not talking about getting games yet, wich is the worst part. In 2 years, I made a collection of more than 200 games in Steam alone. When I had a 360, in the course of 6 months, counting XBLA games, I had like 15 and that's because I grabbed most from the bargain bin and from *gasp* used games.
So yeah, if you'd ask me wich one is better, I'd say wholeheartedly that PC gaming is the better, but because I can afford it, not because I consider myself as the "glorious master race" of gaming.
I can see your points, as I've already considered them myself and they're valid points too, buying a piece of hardware that you rarely need to update every few years and all that. Also, as a PC gamer, I play a lot of PC games using my Xbox 360 controller. It's not a matter of wich one is better, it's a matter of wich one I'd like to use at that moment (also, rarely, because it's the better option).
But also, there's the "cost" factor, wich I already went through and I realised that, despite it's pecularities, PC gaming is a lot more cheaper than console gaming. Let's say you buy and Xbox 360 right now. If you want the better deal, you need to get an Elite edition, because of it's wireless capabilities and the amount of memory inside the harddrive, wich is becoming more and more important in consoles over time.
If you buy a Core console, you're pretty much screwed, because, if you're lucky, you'll get a decent amount of harddrive space, but not enough. Also, it doesn't come with wireless conectivity out of the box, making you buy an insanely expensive peripherial, same with the outlandish prices Microsoft has with their harddrives.
Also, there's the Xbox Live factor, one that, as a long time PC gamer, saw a barebones functionality compared to what I already had for almost a decade before. And I'm not talking about getting games yet, wich is the worst part. In 2 years, I made a collection of more than 200 games in Steam alone. When I had a 360, in the course of 6 months, counting XBLA games, I had like 15 and that's because I grabbed most from the bargain bin and from *gasp* used games.
So yeah, if you'd ask me wich one is better, I'd say wholeheartedly that PC gaming is the better, but because I can afford it, not because I consider myself as the "glorious master race" of gaming.