At this point I'm quoting you because it bothers you.Straying Bullet said:It's hard to break up paragraphs and still quote me back when I asked you to break up and quote me back or not at all.Ocoton said:Been around since September, just simply couldn't be bothered posting. You're not worth the effort of trolling. And go ahead and report me then. It doesn't effect me in the slightest.
Seems you are blind/deaf, I pity you. Have a wonderful day sir!
Whoa, major misunderstanding, I wasn't calling that guy an elitist, and I know he didn't say anything like I said was an elitist statement. Literally all I was doing was providing a quote an elitist might say.Saphra20 said:Dude you sound like a major asshole at the moment he never said anything like your saying and to be frank, Adventure, RTS, and in the words of Yahtzze 'The lack or mouse controls will always cripple consule FPS..' found in his Turok review. So yes certan types of games are ment for PCs more. As you can tell my vote is PC. Also I would consider myself higher up than some of the dribuling ideots who play there so called hardcore Mulitplayer FPS's, shouting at eachother throw there headsets that the other player is such a noob. This dosent apply to everone I'm just stating my feeling for that.OhJohnNo said:Gee, your name gave me no indication at all as to which you were going to vote for.More Fun To Compute said:PC. I like to sit forward and be engaged by games, not be put to sleep by them. Since apparently seating preference is the only thing we are allowed to mention without being elitist.
Also, nah, saying "I prefer PCs because I like *insert certain aspects here* and think it's better for *insert certain genre here*." is not elitist. I think the elitist threshold is when you say "*insert certain genre here* is factually better on PC, no questions asked, anyone who thinks otherwise is obviously retarded, and all those who play on consoles are lesser beings than I."
I'll say why PC is better in a short list:
1:Better aim and use capubilitys.(Mouse)
2:New game are affordable to everone.
3:Life span past 2-3 years.
4:Best internet capubilitys.
5:Starcraft 2. Best game ever.(Don't arugue with this ponit it wount make a difference)
Thows are some resons why PC is better.
How much does a PS3 with move cost? And more importantly, how the hell do I go about building a computer? I'm sure I've stated in this thread already how useless I am with computers. I would not know how to put a computer together, even if I found the money to buy all the parts. As for Left 4 Dead, was that in a steam sale? Ah well, I can still buy Left 4 dead 2 for £10 in Amazon if I want, which isn't much more than... whatever $5 translates to in £. Oh, on top of that, why would I want to hook up a PC to a TV when I use it to browse the internet and post on forums so much? (Besides, the whole "console+TV" argument is irrelevant to me as I have to connect my 360 to a computer monitor to play it, and it isn't a particularly big one).Ocoton said:Only one problem with that. You see, a gaming pc that can play the most high end games here costs the same amount as a ps3 with move, assuming you're not a fool and get the parts and assemble yourself, which is not complicated at all. The price of a upgrade in card which isn't all that expensive every 2 or 3 years is more than compensated by the cheap cost of pc games. For example, left for dead two on my 360 would cost $70. It was $5 for the pc. Let me flick through a short list of the cost for console and pc, and calculate the savings i've made. I wont list the entire thing here because its a huge list. But basically, i've saved, just by playing on the pc rather than my console, roughly a grand. That would more than pay for a pc far stronger than what i'm running. I do believe your argument is invalid. Also, you could very easily use your 360 controller to run all of these games, and your pc can be hooked up to a tv. So basically it'd be identical, except a quarter of the cost and twice the quality.OhJohnNo said:Direct response to quoted guy:Ocoton said:It seems strange to me that no one has figured out that if a keyboard and mouse isn't the most practical control system for a game, you can in fact connect a controller to your pc.
So you want us to spend the extra money you need to buy a PC (normally around $600 - not sure how to convert that to £ - which I've heard people laughably describe as "cheap") to do something you could easily do on a console anyway for a much cheaper price?
General argument:
And yes, I know a PC is much more than a gaming platform and all that. Well, here's the thing. I already have a PC that can do everything I'd ever want a PC to do... except game. I shouldn't have to spend hundreds on what essentially amounts to the ability to game, while in the process losing most of my current PC's customisation. The only genre I care about that I'm missing out on is the RTS genre, I can do everything else I want on the 360 while using my computer to... do computer stuff.
It is cheaper in the long run though, what with games being much cheaper, and you don't have to upgrade as much as you think. Even when you do have to upgrade, there are tonnes of old gems going cheaply on steam. So just play those until you can afford it.D0WNT0WN said:I prefer consoles mostly I dont have the money to upgrade to play a newer game.
lol, Currently £10 = $15.60OhJohnNo said:As for Left 4 Dead, was that in a steam sale? Ah well, I can still buy Left 4 dead 2 for £10 in Amazon if I want, which isn't much more than... whatever $5 translates to in £.
OK, but what does $5 equal in £?Continuity said:lol, Currently £10 = $15.60OhJohnNo said:As for Left 4 Dead, was that in a steam sale? Ah well, I can still buy Left 4 dead 2 for £10 in Amazon if I want, which isn't much more than... whatever $5 translates to in £.