Capt.CupoNoodles wrote:
Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Capt.CupoNoodles wrote:
That's their own damn fault...if they were smart, they'd stop paying $399 a year for a new console, $50-$60 per game, and whatever the hell for XBox Live (that goes to Micro$oft ANYWAY - not EA) and smarten up and buy a computer that alows mods, add-ons and more than a year-life.
Oh, that's right...PC gaming is "on it's way out", anyway.
Bah.
Actually, consoles have a life span of 4-5 years before a newer version comes out. And so what if games are $50-60, PC games are $50 as well. Plus, you can go to your local video store and rent a game for the console if you want. You don't have to buy it and then find out it sucks rocks.
Consoles definitely have some advantages. One of their main advantages is also their main disadvantage. Upgradeability. In so much that consoles have a fixed hardware platform, it makes it much easier for developers to make games because they don't have to code like they do for a PC. For the PC they have to try and make it playable given a wide variety of configurtions. For a console design that just isn't a problem because everyone has the exact same specifications. By the same token, it is many years before console gamers can enjoy the enhancements in hardware which we see regularly.
Consoles also tend to get far more titles than PCs do. The game library to consoles is far larger than for PCs, and the chances that a PC game will also have a console version is far more likely than a console game having a PC version.
By the way, console ports suck A** anyway...I've NEVER found one that was worth it...controls, graphics, all sub-PC standard.
Read PC Gamer...you'll never find out too late that a game sucks.
(
Http://www.pcgamer.com)
Get a subscription...try the demo...NEVER buy a game without the info...sheesh!
And XBox is just a mini PC, folks...HD, Graphics card...who's kidding WHO?
Unless the game was simultaneously designed for both PC and console, yes the ports do tend to suck; primarily in the area of coding.
Consoles are still more frequently played at lower resolutions that PC games because they are meant to played on a TV. However, much of that is changing as HDTV sets become more standard.
Controls have always been my major gripe with consoles. I hate console controllers, but I mainly play FPS games, so those type of controls don't suit me. However, they are far better suited to some types of games than a mouse and keyboard.
Game magazines are like anything else. If you read different magazines you will often get varying opinions, and they are just that, opinions. What the writer considers a good game may not be a good game by other people's standards. A good example of this is Black. I moderate on a computer hardware/software web site forum. In the games section several people had chimed in on the game Black. They said it wasn't too bad, but certainly not worth buying...just rent it was the concensus, as it wasn't that good, and had no replay value. However, the reviewer of one of our local newspapers, who does game reviews, gave it very high marks and recommended it. Demos are fine and all, but they just don't give you enough feel for the game to justify making a decision.
And yes, consoles are computers, just very specialized computers. They were built with one thing in mind, and that is playing games. The general PC that
most people have are actually not as powerful as a game console. Sure you have enthusiests that spend hundreds of dollars several times per year to have the fastest hardware possible, but that is a small minority of computer owners.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a console fan, and in fact really dislike consoles for the most part. I don't own one, don't plan on buying one, and will continue to be a PC gamer. I'm simply pointing out that consoles do have many benefits over PC gaming that people find more appealing than dealing with gaming on the PC.