Why don't you play games on PC?

[King of Asgaard]

Well, in my case it's because I lack a proper gaming PC (they're so expensive and take up so much room) so the only PC games I play are ones which don't tax my laptop's integrated graphics card (which is the only part which is lacking), such as Bastion.

 

[xPixelatedx]

I like PC gaming, mainly for mods and better FPS controllers, but I would call myself a console gamer. I have all three consoles, and it's safe to say I have put 100x the game time into those that I have the PC. Here are the reasons why:

1. I like actually buying games. This thing I am holding in my hand right now? It's the game cart to 'Castlevania order of Ecclesia' for the Nintendo DS. This is mine. Nintendo and/or Konami can go under and cease to exist as companies, or the world could be in semi nuclear war... and I can still play this Castlevania game on my DS. No one can tell me I can't, no matter who I piss off. I don't have to worry about my DS being permanently turned off and my games erased if I make a 'mean' comment on a message board. Like most things I own, I can also sell this Castlevania game to anyone I wish without worrying about all my other DS tittles being erased.

2. Split screen. While it may not be widely available in this day and age, it once was and i still would have missed out on some of the funnest times in gaming that anyone could have. Sorry, playing with someone online doesn't even compare, even if they are also still your friend. Playing with people in the same room is a party, and that is something greater then what the internet can provide.

3. Some of the best games ever made are still console exclusives. Zelda, Shadow of the Colossus, etc. The PC has some great exclusives to, but I have yet to see a single PC game make me say: Man, I wish I had a gaming rig. Funny story, I now have a fairly good PC and I am still playing games off of it more.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Because keyboard and mouse > controller.

Console RPGs are dumbed down and stupid.

Console shooters are slow and skilless (aim assist, much?).

Capthca: win hands down

 

[BreakfastMan]

Wow, a number of my fellow PC gamers are being right asses to the console-exclusive gamers. Really guys? Is it really that important that you prove them wrong? Man, I don't understand why so many people have a stick up their butt about this...

I'm primarily a PCGamer, but I do own an X360, originally intended for the Halo series, but later also for RDR and Rock Band.

But despite having caved and bought said console, I also believe that consoles cause a stagnation in the further development of video games.

You don't improve the tech on consoles, 'cus there's nothing new to work with.

Maybe optimization gets a little boost here and there, but improvements made by virtue of the PC gamers basically counts every damn thing you could think of, and I shiver at the thought of how much faster we could be improving our tech if all the Console gamers would switch over

Not to mention what effect that would have on what's possible in videogames today.

Now, I know many people would say things like "Yeah, but do we really need that?" or "Meh, it looks fine as it is", but I can only ask, what if we'd said the same thing ten, or even just five years ago? Where would we be?

To me, looking at consoles and saying "Yeah, I'm satisfied" is to look at horse-drawn carriages and go "Meh, why did we ever invent the car?"

(Or to look at Earth and go "Meh, we don't need no Spacemen.")

I disagree with your entire premise. If consoles cause stagnation, the entire game industry should have ground to a halt by now, since A: consoles have been around nearly as long as video games have and B: ever since the NES have been the main place where most people play their games. And there have been many great games that have used their limited tech to great effect. Ever wondered why the Silent Hill devs choose to use so much fog? It is because the PSX had a crappy draw-distance. Seriously, that idea only makes sense if you are talking about graphics tech, the increase cost of which has not exactly been kind to the market.

That's the thing though. Consoles causing stagnation doesn't mean it all grinds to a halt, but only that it slows down. And it has slowed down.

And you're right, a lot of games have been doing some amazing things on limited tech. I remember seeing Crysis 2 on X360, and I was quite impressed at what they had made happen.
But that has nothing to do with further development.

Silent Hill devs didn't "choose" to fog it up. They were forced to.
Did it work well for the game? You bet it did!
But should they have had a choice, or at least the option of using more realistic smoke? I believe they should.
On PC, the smoke effects in Metro 2033 are absolutely amazing.

And improving hardware for gaming doesn't just mean "shinier pixels". We have the capability to make some extremely good looking stuff, but it's not being used because we don't have power to run it available to people.

Stuff like higher resolution textures and ten mile draw distances.

ArmA is doing it on PC, and we're seeing Skyrim mods that improve the texture resolutions eight-fold, and damn does Skyrim look absolutely gorgeous with some of the mods made for it.

But it all requires power, and that power is only gonna progress faster and cheaper with more people in the market for it.

I am sorry, but nearly 30 years of history disagrees with you. If consoles cause stagnation, we should be a much different place than we are now. We are not, so I am inclined to believe that consoles do not. :/ And really, the only stagnation that is happening, in your eyes, is in graphics. Which, to many people, don't matter nearly that much, and you really have provided no counter arguments to this. Do most gamers care that we do not have 10-mile draw distances? Nope. And increased graphics have only sent development costs sky-rocketing.

 

[Vigormortis]

I do play some games on PC. I'd play more, but I hate Mouse and Keyboard, don't want to upgrade a unit I primarily use for music, web browsing, and writing, and like playing on two separate screens (playing and writing, playing and browsing, etc).

Before anyone tears me a new one, it's not hard or "too expensive" to upgrade my tower. I still don't particularly want to do it. I prefer the console experience.

This right here is what people should be saying. Most of the other "claims" are either tenuous at best or down-right false at worst. Like it always being more expensive, too much of a hassle, too unreliable, or too complicated. (not to mention the whole controller/couch bs) Just ludicrous.

However; and don't take this as me trying to "convert" you or something but rather just mentioning; but now-a-days you can game on one screen and web-browse/write on another. Even with laptops. A simple composite or HDMI cable (or DVI) plugged into your TV and your laptop/desktop will, as long as your GPU supports it, allow you to play a game on one screen and do other things on the other.

My current desktop setup is like this. I have a monitor and my big HD tv plugged into it. In fact, right now, I'm playing Diablo 2 on the big screen while I'm typing this and listening to music.

 

[Lord Kodous]

I only play old RTSs, TBSs, the occasional puzzle game and Audio Surf on my computer because my computer is 7-8 years old and I don't feel like getting a new one because this still works. Also I don't like the keyboard/mouse control scheme: too clunky in my opinion. i have an Xbox 360 and most of the games I like are on that.

 

[Something Amyss]

I prefer the console experience.

Jaggies?

Yes. What else could I possibly have meant.

 

[Mysticgamer]

Mass Effect 3 and Diablo 3 would melt my netbook's processor and screen.

 

[infohippie]

I have the opposite issue. I refuse to play games on console because I really dislike using controllers and unlike PC comsoles don't give you a choice. I'd buy a console right away if I could expect mouse & keyboard support as standard in games, but even if you can get a mouse & keyboard working on a console almost nothing will let you play using them.

 

[CarlsonAndPeeters]

Two main reasons:

1) I only have a laptop and, while it can run games, its never particularly smooth and always requires more time spent tweaking setting all around (and I'm not great with computers) than I really want to spend. Consoles are just more convenient

2) My dorm has a common room that I share with three roommates. We have a nice TV with an Xbox and a Wii. It always seems kind of anti-social to me to sit in front of my computer with headphones on when I could game with my friends.

That being said, I would play more PC games if I had the money for a nice gaming computer. But I don't, so other than occasional retro Steam sale purchases and Minecraft, I don't play PC games.

 

[Worgen]

If you don't play PC games, why?

A few people have probably beaten me to the punch on these, but since you asked:

(1) Because playing a game with an input device originally designed for typing letters rather than game-playing has always been clumsy and awkward, at least to me, and

(2) Because I can't afford to buy a load of new computer parts every time a new game comes out.

That second thing, in particular, is by far the biggest reason I've stuck with consoles: all I have to do is turn them on, put the disk in, and play. I guess I'll have to find a way to afford more PC games, though, if some of the crap I've heard about the next-gen consoles turns out to be true...

Actually the slow console cycle and the fact its getting more and more expensive to make graphics better mean that PCs last much much longer then they did before.

 

[Jfswift]

I play on both pc and console but to be honest I prefer console just because it's faster to get the game up and running (at least with my dinosaur of a pc).

 

[zerobudgetgamer]

Because touch screens don't translate well through emulators.

Seriously, as of right now, that's pretty much the only time I'm not playing on my computer, when I'm playing on my DS. Of course, I've got my PS2, but the number of "new" games I can get for that are dwindling more and more.

Honestly, though, I can see why some wouldn't want to play on their PCs. Personally, I attribute a large amount of my procrastinative habits over the past decade or so solely to the computer and the Internet. When I didn't have the money to jump head-first into the current generation, I turned my PC into my primary gaming console, and now there's hardly a day when I'm not working that I'm not spending at least 8-10 hours in front of the screen, and even days when I am working the computer's on practically every second I'm home.

 

[Strain42]

Now, I know is can be a tricky topic, and I'm hoping that both sides here can try to keep the insults and snobbery to a minimum. I'm not making this thread to start arguments, I'm just wondering.

If you don't play PC games, why? There are so many reasons out there, I just wanna hear some peoples.

In my case it's because I spend enough time on my computer as it is. I do almost all of my work on the computer, being a cartoonist, and I also do the vast majority of my homework on the computer. That, coupled with the time I spend just being on the web, it adds up to quite a bit of computer time. The last thing I personally wanna do is add "the time I spend playing video games" to that list.

There is one PC game I own that I really would like to play again (Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines) but ever since I got my new PC, I haven't been able to run it. So my PC gaming has pretty much come to a complete halt.

You must be doing something wrong. Steam version runs perfectly on my Win7.

Well I don't use Steam or Windows 7, so neither of those are really relevant to me, sorry.

 

[DaHero]

Now, I know is can be a tricky topic, and I'm hoping that both sides here can try to keep the insults and snobbery to a minimum.

Wait, you want a civil discussion on the internet? BWAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!! What is this, an April Fools Joke?

There is no such thing as civil discussion on the internet...oh man...I mean don't get me wrong, I can't fault you for trying but...wow...

On topic: I play on the PC, I bought my computer about 4 years ago. I'm looking at possibly having to make a $50 upgrade sometime soon, but considering that the majority of the games I've bought were +50% off, I've saved money in the long run. I can also use the PC for college work, and if I ever want to play a certain genre, odds are I can get a game for free and play until bored. the F2P scene on the PC is massive, making the PC the only platform that can cater to my every whim.

Now, I WILL play on the console if I have company over, or am going to another persons house, because it's very difficult to move my tower everywhere/play LAN on a keyboard.

That's just it. There is a lot of RTSs and MMOs, but I don't like those genres.
I like single player hack and slash games that aren't just "auto-attack with dice rolls and button mapped powers", FPSs, and action RPGs. There doesn't seem to be near as many of those as on console. Basically, games like God of War and Killzone 3 which are exclusives of playstation systems. Like I said before, I'm not sure where to look for PC equivalents of these games in the first place.

Dude, I will point you in the right direction if you give me a forum PM, I promise. I know just the games for you.

 

[Racecarlock]

Because then I can't pause GTA IV on my xbox then go straight to browsing and lurking and posting on here before unpausing and playing a bit more. I like to keep the internet open. Besides which, a lot of games seem to think that completely getting rid of fullscreen toggles was a good idea. It messes with quicktime when the fullscreen thing messes with my display.

 

[The_Echo]

I currently own a Mac. That's why I don't play games on a PC.

Now, I do play some games on my computer. But this machine is old and outdated--some of its parts were outdated when the thing was brand new--to the point of having to strain just to run my web browser. Playing Minecraft is a veritable nightmare.

 

[way2sl0w]

5. My laptop (which runs Crysis and The Witcher 2 on high) cost £500. More expensive than a console yes, but I can carry it around, do my uni work on it, Facebook and go on Twitter and forums and Youtube with it, watch DVDs on it, store all my photos and music on it too. It's the ultimate media centre for me.

What make and model??

 

[Vault101]

my laptop is decent enough for current gen (well...was at least) thease days I stick to console purely for reliability

 

[LiquidSolstice]

Have to say, 'becuase I want to use a controller' is not a good reason as you can use every controller known to man on the PC.

And it always works. The way it's meant to. All the time.

This is the snobbery I can't stand from PC gamers. The classic comparison between a mouse/keyboard to a controller. There simply is none because the two are never pitted against each other.

No serious automotive race in the world pits cars against motorbikes. Motorbikes race other motorbikes, cars race other cars. It is obvious that motorbike racers will always favor motorbikes and car racers will always favor cars.

It's perfectly acceptable to say "I want to use a controller" because when every single game on the platform is designed to solely be manipulated with a controller and not a mouse/keyboard/joystick/gamepad/etc, the controls will be consistently solid and uniform. That's not to say PC controls aren't solid, but the fact of the matter is that as far as control setups go, console game developers have a lot less to worry about compared to PC game devs.

The above aside, I find a controller to be more comfortable to hold, I feel that Rumble/Vibration add a lot to a game, and I like analog control in movement.