Consoles or PC?

[jimmy j]

I'm 100% for consoles myself. No hassle, plug n' play gaming for 5 years at a time

 

[MC DUI]

I'm with you, it's all the mucking around with updating drivers and buying new hardware just to get games functioning that turns me off PC gaming.

I'm not completely adverse to playing PC games, just prefer the comfort and ease of playing games on consoles.

 

[cheapassdave]

im more into the pc because i love FPSs and its great online capabilities. when im playing the 360 it just feels like im playing a watered down pc

 

[2cb2ct7]

Have to back the consoles... No brand spankin new f'n $600 video card required just to play the latest releases...

 

[darksavior]

I like my pc for online gaming and fps. Console for everything else. Fps on consoles just sucks, sucks, sucks with pad.

 

[dsbomb]

Have to back the consoles... No brand spankin new f'n $600 video card required just to play the latest releases...

Nah, just $600 consoles. The console market has the same sort of expensive bleeding-edge issues the PC does. I've played many PC games quite well with a less than top-notch system. I don't need every blade of grass swaying independently with the wind to be able to enjoy a game's action. Turn 'em down a bit, and get to the part where you have fun, rather than obsessing with having more polygons than your neighbor.

 

[jimmy j]

Have to back the consoles... No brand spankin new f'n $600 video card required just to play the latest releases...


Nah, just $600 consoles. The console market has the same sort of expensive bleeding-edge issues the PC does. I've played many PC games quite well with a less than top-notch system. I don't need every blade of grass swaying independently with the wind to be able to enjoy a game's action. Turn 'em down a bit, and get to the part where you have fun, rather than obsessing with having more polygons than your neighbor.

Buy a console and enjoy your games the way they were meant to be played - with all those dials turned up to 10!

 

[Lukeage]

Have to back the consoles... No brand spankin new f'n $600 video card required just to play the latest releases...


Nah, just $600 consoles. The console market has the same sort of expensive bleeding-edge issues the PC does. I've played many PC games quite well with a less than top-notch system. I don't need every blade of grass swaying independently with the wind to be able to enjoy a game's action. Turn 'em down a bit, and get to the part where you have fun, rather than obsessing with having more polygons than your neighbor.

Buy a console and enjoy your games the way they were meant to be played - with all those dials turned up to 10!

That maybe be true at the beginning, but by the end PCs are definitely ahead (obviously they cost more, but if you want it, its there). Up until this generation, consoles have also been limited by standard definition. Most hardcore PC gamers have been playing in 'high definition' for many many years. Remember that even 720p has less pixels than 1280x1024 and isn't a huge jump ahead of 1024x768.

I'm already playing some games on resolutions higher than 1080p on my PC (although 1920x1200 isn't that much more), but gamers with the money can get their SLI 8800 rigs and 30" monitors that go even higher than that already.

Back to the main topic though. It depends on the game. You could even break the question down further into PC vs Console vs Handheld. All three have varying types of inputs, so that is one factor I'll ignore for now. PCs have the advantage of games being easily modable, however, they have the disadvantage of needing to be setup (although I can't remember the last time I've had a showstopper issue for a PC game). Consoles have the advantage of quick setup and are better suited to 'casual' gaming (ie, bunch of friends round, easier to fire up the console than organise PC gaming). Handhelds have the advantage of being portable, and many of the games can be played at quick intervals or paused at any time without issues.

In the end I have no major preference towards any of the platforms. Whatever offers the best experience for a certain game, thats the system I'll use.

 

[FAST6191]

First for me it is really resolution schemsolution, provided the UI fits well enough on the screen (play something like morrowind on low res and see) I am happy.

Personally it all really started for me with a nes, I soon realised that the PC was the way forward for me: emulation being the big drive and the fact I could do more than games. Ease of use does not really factor in to it for me: I have opposable thumbs and a brain that wastes a serious bit of energy for a reason.

As for £600 a card most halfway sensible types wait a few months, that way drivers are good and prices are low: a couple of years ago I looked at building an SLI system: motherboard £1000 or so, 5 months ago my entire system (with SLI) cost me £1200 new. I often find even the most cutting edge stuff can not play top of the line either.

As it stands someone has yet to show me a better way to play an FPS than a mouse and a keyboard (the n64 and xbox are good certainly but nowhere near better).

As for handhelds they are an entirely different league, virtual boy and light issues aside I think Nintendo got it right for the most part.

In the end I am a tightass so no winner provided I wait, games get good (any of honestly think launch titles stand after a few years on a regular basis), drivers get good (even consoles/handhelds have firmware updates), stuff gets cheap (I only got an xbox about a year ago), hype gets dissipated, cracks/security holes get found (my only problem as they tend to be for early iterations) and my internet connection gets faster: dial up is OK for nes and snes but an unripped PSX game?

 

[xcalibur]

http://uk.gear.ign.com/articles/799/799262p1.html
this might be a a serious contender against your keyboard and mouse

 

[Lukeage]

Personally it all really started for me with a nes, I soon realised that the PC was the way forward for me: emulation being the big drive and the fact I could do more than games. Ease of use does not really factor in to it for me: I have opposable thumbs and a brain that wastes a serious bit of energy for a reason.

Just two things I'll quickly comment on.

Firstly, the multiuse of a PC. When people bring up the fact that a PC costs more, I always wonder, how many people with $600 to spend on a console don't already own a PC? If you are buying a PC anyway, the extra cost to make it a gaming rig should be the comparative price to a console, not the entire PC. (It may still come to more than the console itself...)

Secondly, "I have opposable thumbs and a brain that wastes a serious bit of energy for a reason." Most people would be dumbfounded by what they might need to do to fix issues. While I think that a lot of serious gamers would probably have no issues with this, it is a jump for those that can't do much on a PC without someone holding their hand. Just even step it up to editing the registry or any other manual editing, and you lose even people who can get by without too much trouble.

 

[Maikel Steneker]

I voted handheld. I have both handhelds and consoles, but handhelds seem to become better than consoles... And they're even more plug and play!

 

[FAST6191]

With regard to fixing a PC I agree, I have quite regularly been called to fix trivial faults for people who can diagnose and fix faults on machines far more complex than windows (or worse Word). Interesting analogy on the price issue though, never heard it termed like that before.

Also, I has never been an issue before really but how many people need to tack on several hundred currency of choice for a "HD" TV these days.
And of course you have the usual:
controller x3 (assuming you get one) maybe with extra junk: wireless, rumble, power packs
memory card x a few (as they are fairly proprietary you can bet that "huge" 16 meg card will cost you several tens of the price of a USB/cf/SD memory equivalent: anyone remember the PS1 memory card bundled with a magazine a few years back).
cable related expenses (controller extensions, RCA/Scart/RF: you can almost bet that machine does not have what you want, SP-Dif, HDMI.......). Network cables including routers and such these days as well.
headsets seem of some importance of late as well.
Coupled with the network above I suppose I better add xbox live (with the exception of the DC, DS and PSP who really uses/used any of the other consoles offerings), that costs as well, hold on I have to renew my subscription to Unreal, oh wait.
keyboard perhaps?
Games are that little bit more as well, perhaps not important for the general readership here but for man in street (which I sense is the angle most are going for here) at the cost of 3 or 4 audio cds (at least until price drops and second hand) it can get nasty.

If anyone can tell me this bunch of stuff is not a) overpriced and b) "necessary" at some point (ever been round someones house who does not have a similar setup to this/yours or even had a better setup than yourself).

Just as a final thought: my own music (should I want any) is quite easy to have with a PC game, most other times I have to resort to hacking to get what I want (not normally an "easy" option) or an external source.

 

[jimmy j]

anyone remember the PS1 memory card bundled with a magazine a few years back?

PlayStation World #1. I loved that mag!

Fingers crossed for a 360 memory card on the cover of OXM

 

[Deleted User]

I voted for handhelds, as they just seem to suit me better and because I'm owning a lot more of them than TV-consoles. But i also like console gaming. The only games I play on PC/Mac are either ScummVM driven or sometimes emulated.

 

[nephdj]

PC

I dont read into the whole "600 dollar video card" stuff, as my 6800 ultra was $100 2nd hand

plays most games on medium at a high frame rate

but my handheld is used for being on the train everyday to collage

 

[AWESOME_noob]

Voted PC cos its the MOST backwardly compatible gaming platform- therefore the biggest range/variety of games available...as well as emulators

 

[fischju_original]

PC is the best, no doubts. You can play with anything a console can (same controllers) on any TV a console can. There are many more games for PCs, and the extra cost is worth it. For $1200 you can make a PC with better graphics than the PS3, but can do everything else a PC can. But I don't really see a reason to say all of that. All I need to say is:

Half-Life 2 in 1280x1024 with the graphics turned ALL the way up

 

[legendofphil]

I wouldn't vote any of them, owning a high end PC, Wii, 360 and DS, I would say that there are pros and cons to each.
Certain games I prefer on the each.
Such as:
FPS - PC
3D Platform - Console
Puzzle - Handheld.

 

[xcalibur]

Its not a question, everyone here has a cmputer so it wins by default

Seriously though, pc gamers and console gamers are two different breeds.
Console games is much more casual than PC gaming since online connectivity and competition has been a part of it since a loooong time. Its only beng standerdised now in the console community.
Console have much more variety though, out of the thousands of pc games, none feature much difference. Innovation? Yes, Uniqueness? NO!
Yet for consoles and handhelds its a lot different.
In the end, its just like music and books, its only your personal preference which matters

I chose consoles btw, Guitar Hero FTW