Zeh Don said:
This is why you fail to grasp anything and why you're making a fool of yourself: my PC has to run everything while my 360 only has to run games.
There is no bloated OS, background tasks, Digitial Distribution services, DRM, driver issues, or whatever other bullshit publishers and developers deem necessary to straddle the PC Platform with (we're running AAA games in browsers now?).
The Xbox 360 hardware stretched further than comparable PC hardware by a solid seven years fucking years. This is why the industry shifted to the consoles - there's more money to be made, less fucking around in terms of making it, and you don't have to accommodate that kid who didn't upgrade their machine last year. You just make your game and sell it.
-Bloated OS: More HD useage, 0.5% of my CPU useage, 1Gb RAM useage and 0% GPU useage (That is what my GPU monitor is telling me). So... A little extra CPU and RAM useage. Sure, more RAM than a console has in total, but RAM is the cheapest piece of PC equipment out there. 12Gb for $50. That 1Gb is nothing.
-Digital Distribution services: What, like XBL and PSN? Umm. You're point is?
-DRM: Yes, 'cause Skyrim had intense DRM that I can't play the game with. The worst DRM is often on the worst console ports. It is a problem of devs frankly not giving a shit nor knowing anything about the PC market. Out of all my games, most of them have the only form of DRM as Steam - similar to XBL or PSN - or please insert your disk. Most of the exceptions have an 'offline mode' after first install, and few games are as draconic and stupid as Ubisoft's.
-Driver issues: Never had one. Keep it up to date, and there is a 1 in a million chance you'll get one. Besides, there are plenty of stories about PS/Xbx firmware updates breaking consoles for people too.
-Browsers: We are not playing them in browsers, we are launching them off browsers. What is sad is that consoles still launch primarily off CD/DVD or bluray. HDDs are much faster, and SSDs are even better still. Browsers are a streamlined way to launch a game on slow PCs: You don't have to wait for the whole game to loadup and run and then make your way through menus to get anything done. You just load up a browser, make a few selections, then boot straight into that selection.
The Xbox 360 hardware stretched further than comparable PC hardware by a solid seven years fucking years. This is why the industry shifted to the consoles - there's more money to be made, less fucking around in terms of making it, and you don't have to accommodate that kid who didn't upgrade their machine last year. You just make your game and sell it.
Comparable PC hardware? Or Compatible PC hardware for its time? My PC from seven years back ran BF3 at a mix of Ultra (Textures) High and Medium settings (Medium for most, High for about 2). It cost me $1000 AU, buying from Australia. Hardware prices have gone down, and I could get a rig with more power than a XB720 or W/E for a comparable rate, especially when game pricing s are taken into account.
Yes, a PC with console specs would fail. That's why PCs have good specs.
Might I also point out that PC games are, by default, better than console games. Higher native resolution than most, and extra post processing effects added in by the GPU itself mean even a PC game on lowest settings will often look better than a console game. And when it doesn't, you just broke you're "and you don't have to accommodate that kid who didn't upgrade their machine last year" argument, as apparently they still are. Take into account also wider FoV, longer view distances, higher FPS - you're seven year console/PC gap is based off console settings compared to highest settings. If you want Raw FPS, I could quite easily put on a game like Skyrim on lowest settings and get 250+FPS. That's more than seven times a 30FPS console.
The industry shifted to consoles because they sold well to the general public. They were a 'cool' and cheap way to game. Now that is becoming less true. If you know what you're doing, or know someone who knows what they're doing, you can get a PC for a comparable price to a console that will run games far better than it, with games that can be bought for a cheaper price, and the option to cheaply upgrade the PC modularly instead of buying an entirely new model. MS and Sony are going to keep pushing their consoles to the public though, as they don't know any better. After seeing what my PC can do now, and hearing about how little comparatively it cost me, people I know are starting to ask me to design rigs for them that will get them max settings in most games for a cheap price. Know what? Even going Nvidia and Intel, the two more expensive options, I have not yet designed one rig over $1200 - at that high because I used SLI graphics as opposed to just moving up to a better chip for better cost efficiency.
And the whole 'and you don't have to accommodate that kid who didn't upgrade their machine last year' argument is entirely bull. In fact, you are ONLY catering to the kid who didn't upgrade his machine last year by designing for console.
Cronq said:
Here is why you are absolutely and utterly wrong: [words]
Basically everything you said was wrong. Not only was it poorly informed and thus incorrect, it was poorly worded and made little to no sense. You're grasping at concepts you clearly fail to comprehend.
Firstly: games are made for consoles. So, you're expensive PC hardware is used... to run console ports. Or MMOs, where the graphical presentation is the equivalent to an iPhone game. Or Facebook games, but I don't think you're that far down the food chain, so I'll leave it there. The biggest games of the year were all console games, champ.
Secondly: due to the fact that developers get more out of a console in terms of sheer performance and performance value, the comparable PC hardware required to run console titles is around the 400-600% mark. So, if your current PC hardware is twice as powerful in terms of performance as the Xbox 360 (you get 60FPS in Battlefield 3 at Max settings, 60 FPS in Skyrim at max settings, etc.) you'll need to upgrade your current PC hardware to around four times it's current power to even run the next generation of games that the consoles usher in.[/quote]
Firstly: BF3. Designed for PC, not an MMO with Iphone graphics, nor a facebook game. Shogun 2: Total War. Try getting a console to run a 20000 soldier battle with the graphics in that game and a comparable framerate. Crysis 1. Better graphics on everything by default, not even including graphical options. Might I also point out Blizzard would like a word with you. SC2's graphics weren't bad, and a console couldn't run them on max settings (My friend tried with an equivilent card. <10FPS).
Secondly: Wrong. You are comparing below lowest settings to highest settings. Show me an Xbox that runs BF3 at max settings, then I'll give your comparison some credence. Until then, wrong due to an uneven comparison. There will be no need for new hardware to play games that the 720 will run, only to deal with the increased PC advanced offering even higher graphical fidelity than we have now, with more effects and more everything.
Cronq said:
But at least you have your friendly $300 price point and motion controllers.
AU$600.00 once every seven years. Grants me access to every major game released, exactly as it was designed and intended.
AU$3,000.00 once every year (AU$21,000.00 every seven years). Grants me access to... the same games. And driver issues, hardware compatibility issues, online only DRMs, etc.[/quote]
$3000.00AU? You were MAJORLY ripped off. I am not even joking here, if you paid that for your rig, shoot yourself. That is like paying 2,000 for a 360. That is just... Wow. Whoever sold you that, never go back there. Ever.
Also note: Not the same games. The same gameplay wise, but smoother play thanks to higher FPS, better looking thanks to better graphics, and faster loading thanks to the HDD/SSD you are using. Not to mention cheaper by $10. Per game. 10 games, that's an extra $100 for using a console.
Also note, a PC isn't like a console. You don't need a new one every 7 years. Lets just pretend you did buy your PC for $3,000.00. Know what you need to spend every seven years from now on to upgrade it? $250 max, if you're going for high end. This is what consoles cause, low system requirements and slow advancement end with PC gamers getting cheap upgrades by only buying a graphics card every seven years. Hell, sometimes you don't need a graphics card even. These days, not even the full 4 cores of most modern CPUs are being used by most programs. Rather than upgrade CPU, you just wait for them to figure out that there are 4 cores being used these days. If they don't, then you don't need to upgrade either as nothing more is going to be being used. And this is for max settings BTW. Lower settings, no need for an upgrade at all.
By listing Motion Controls, you're showing your bias. If you think consoles are for the "weaker gamers" ask yourself: what games are you currently playing?
My Quad Core, 4gb DDR2 and ATI Radeon 5770 1gb system is able to run every game on the market on max settings, no questions asked. It's three years old - save for the card. Skyrim, LOTRO, Deus Ex: HR, Terraria, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Quake Live - handles everything and anything without a problem.
My Xbox 360 runs everything else I care to play - Dark Souls, Super Street Fighter IV, Halo Reach, Mass Effect 1/2, Gears of War, Alan Wake, XBLA titles, etc.
The motion controls argument is old and stupid, and I'll agree with you there. You're handheld controllers though are less precise than KB+M, so we've got you there.
What's the problem, elitist? Worried your 1337 Rig won't get you the "cred" you deserve once we're playing games on a new console?
Nope. Worried my rig won't bust a sweat thanks to having to wait for consoles to catch up. By your posts you have shown you know little about PCs or hardware, that you can't hold a fair comparison and that you are what most would call a 'console elitist' - often just as hated as PC ones, if not more so. Deal with the fact that consoles are old tech, are releasing more old tech, and quite simply can't compare to PCs in terms of power.
Hahaha, honestly man. Take a step back and look at your bullshit.
Take a step back and look at your own. Seriously. I'm calling troll. Either you are purposefully trying to annoy PC gamers with your misinformation and false 'facts', or you know nothing about what you are talking about, yet are trying to prove a point for the fanboy in you. Either way, troll.
And for the record:
The PC crowd will be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars
Wrong, but used sarcastically so somewhat right (In the sense we won't be spending hundreds of thousands).
just so they can keep up with the superior technology and specialization of an econo-box gaming machine
Wrong, but sarcastic so also right (In the sense we won't need to keep up with consoles, they need to keep up with us)
.....built from PC parts.
True of Microsoft. Sony made their own, but rumour is they've learned from that mistake due to poorer returns than they had hoped, meaning PC parts for Sony too... if they end up announcing another console.
Xbox 360 was significantly more powerful (when compared to PC's)back when it was announced
True. In terms of what it could do vs what a PC could do at the time of its announcement, it wasn't too bad. It wasn't equal, but it wasn't that far behind.
and PC's were well past performing it before the thing released.
True, as they built the Xbox 360, more PC hardware became available and cheaper, and when it was finally released, it was far behind PCs. Not as far as it is now, and not as far as the 720 will be if this rumour is true, but still far behind.
By the time 2014 rolls around, and people are just opening up their Xmas Xbox 720's, the PC crowd will be opening their Haswell/Maxwell platform PC's and laptops.
You're right. This is wrong. No self respecting PC player would purchase a prebuilt rig. DIY or GTFO /sarcasm (Seriously though, many people will be doing DIY rather than prebuilt as it is SOOOOO much cheaper).
Consoles will be back in the position of being utterly destroyed in performance and visuals over consoles.
True, though somewhat poorly worded. Thankfully PCs will experience a brief portion of accelerated development, where not hitting the barriers of the console means more money can be put in to make the overall multiplatform game better. As soon as they start optimising though, we'll be in trouble. The money that was being spent on making the game better will start getting spent on making it run better on consoles. Thankfully we still have modders, who will improve the graphics of a game for the devs - seeing as they were more worried about Optimisation than how it looked.
