PC' s: best games machine on the planet

Consoles = Simplicity
PC' s = Microsoft (quite the opposite of simplicity)
Nuff said!

Er don' t M$ mke a console?

Talking of Simplicity the Wii is so easy to setup on a wireless network.

Er don' t M$ mke a console?

They do? Oh boy is my face red or what!

It' s a fact that the PC gaming market embraces more unique ideas due to its open nature for development. You can say that the PC doesn' t have a game like FFX, and while it' s not really true, what really makes it irrelevant is the fact that FFX is a dime a dozen game on the consoles, whereas a game like take Command: Second Manassas is a game that is unlike any other save for Sid Meier' s Civil War series and that' s anywhere including the PC.

A game like Trackmania is unlike anything else, yet Dirt is just another in a long line of offroad racing titles. They are different, stand on their own feet, but they aren' t intellectually different in a way that Trackmania is.

So PC is better because it only has 1 good game of those genres?

Sigh, PC fanboys are so illogical.

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

I think his point was that some games are genre breaking. You get them on both platforms, but since noone owns the PC brand, developers tend to be able to take more risks.

But like I say, sometimes you just want polished tried and true versions of the same games you love to play. Next-gen Daytona USA for example would indeed be awesome! A remake of Papy' s NASCAR series on the other hand probably wouldnt be as popular.

Forgive the random responses, it' s what I get for jumping in 3 pages late!

Yeah, and these things also have crappy cinema players.

If you care about above average picture & sound then you' re not using a TV or your PC for movies.

Modding has proven to be better than anybody imagined, and that' s still [i]not possible on any console.

Betcha' 20 bucks via-paypal that I' ve played modded versions of Halo 2. I love modding, it absolutely rocks, but it' s not exclusively for PC games.

The computer is a gateway to a larger world than video games, and the potential for a video game on a computer is far higher than it is on consoles.

Unless it' s an amazing game, but isn' t mainstream and totally tanks, never to see a sequel or followup. It happens waaaay too often in the PC world, even you will admit that.

PC:
Sam and Max Episode 2: 80%
Silverfall: 62%
C&C 3: 87%
Stalker: 82%
Genesis Rising: 54%
Silent Hunter: 79%
Frontline: 61%
Runaway 2: 71%
Trackmania United: 83%
Battlefield expansion: 76%
The Sacred Rings: 52%
Tortuga Tow Treasures: 47%
Titan Quest expansion: 79%
Sims 2 Seasons: 79%
Sam and Max 4: 81%
MaelStrom: 57%
Supreme Commander: 87%
War Front: Turning Point: 73%
ArmA: Allied Assault: 78%
Galactive Civilizations 2: 91%

So out of 20 games, 7 get the equivalent of a B- or better? Therein lies the problem with PC gaming, while you get the creme-de-la-creme in visuals & overall performance, you' re flooded with titles that have little to no quality control in place.

Also, Sam & Max isn' t a PC exclusive anymore. It' s hitting consoles.

Well, again, I beg to differ. As a college student I run into many reasons why I would need a high end computer. The above reasons still apply. If I want to download music, create a flash animation, attach it to a powerpoint, and act as a game host server, I' m going to need some serious muscle.

And this proves to me that PC' s are the best games machines on the planet? Debating is fine, but lets stay on topic with it.

As a side note to whoever started this thread. Thanks. This is turning out to be one of the best (read as " only" ) intelligent debates on the forums in quite some time.

So PC is better because it only has 1 good game of those genres?

Sigh, PC fanboys are so illogical.

No, the point was that the PC does have games like that, whereas the console tends to have less games that are completely different from the pack. The open nature of PC development makes this a virtual guarantee.

Please don' t have recourse with me in the future, I can tell you' re way too insufficient for dialogue.

That' s his problem. 6600GT' s were the Mid-Low range of cards back when they were released. If you' re going to do SLI, you never ever use two budget cards, because they simply don' t last. SLI is only something you do when you have money to burn on the best of the best. If he had bought two 6800 Ultra' s in SLI, he' d be faring much much better today. Heck, he would have been much better off doing a single 6800GT than two 6600GT' s.

My 04 system, which has an Athlon 64 3000+, 1.5GB RAM and a single 6800GT can still run nearly all games at high settings and decent framerates. If your friend upgraded his graphics card now to something mid ranged, he' d be able to keep that PC for another year+ no problems.

Believe me when I say this. If you' re smart and buy the right components at the right prices, you' ll be able to keep your PC running well for 2-3 years no problems. If you don' t put a bit of thought into your PC, it won' t last half that time.

Yep, it' s up to the PC user to make sure his rig can last. If built correctly, then it' s easy to survive several years without any updating. I' m not very knowledgeable about the PC, but I do know that the idea of, " constantly buying the newest high end hardware" is utterly false. It doesn' t hold up when put into action. It' s a lie that console fanboys have been made to believe.

If you care about above average picture & sound then you' re not using a TV or your PC for movies. ]

Well, no, several people use their PCs for high end video playback.

Betcha' 20 bucks via-paypal that I' ve played modded versions of Halo 2. I love modding, it absolutely rocks, but it' s not exclusively for PC games.

Misleading statement. While Halo has had the benefit of an extra weapon or two. None of this was possible without a PC. Furthermore, while console games even have map making capabilities, they do not have the benefit of open source. There will never be a CS possible for the consoles in this current state. PC modding is bigger, more complex, and has more than anything the console world could offer at this moment in time.

You can' t compare PC modding to Console modding. PC' s abilities make whatever console modifications completely irrelevant in the comparison. It' s a fly to a giant.

Unless it' s an amazing game, but isn' t mainstream and totally tanks, never to see a sequel or followup. It happens waaaay too often in the PC world, even you will admit that.

Great games have tanked in the past, but more have succeeded. The PC world has a huge list of failed classics, successful classics, and classics that are hard to find but still available. There' s simply more of everything on the PC, which is why there are more good and original games.

So out of 20 games, 7 get the equivalent of a B- or better? Therein lies the problem with PC gaming, while you get the creme-de-la-creme in visuals & overall performance, you' re flooded with titles that have little to no quality control in place.

Red Steel/Gundam/Bomberman X360 are examples of quality control? The 7 B- titles you refer to are simply indicative of the amount of quality games released. I' ve challenged you to seek out superior console numbers, and you can' t. Therefore, the PC' s superiority in that order remains.

Also, Sam & Max isn' t a PC exclusive anymore. It' s hitting consoles.

That' s what cash cows typically do.

And this proves to me that PC' s are the best games machines on the planet? Debating is fine, but lets stay on topic with it.

It disproves the theory that the PC has no good games, a lack of original games, and other silly theories. I also went about disproving the lie that the PC must be updated every six months to stay with technology.

I don' t care about platform pissing matches, I care about facts. And if anybody leaves this thread thinking any of the aforementioned lies, then they are simply ignoring the facts.

I must be missing something here.
Compared to consoles the PC is more powerful, can have mods, can do other things than playing videogames, have a more developed online community, and has more " alternative" game ideas.
But despite all that, I enjoy console gaming a hundred times more than PC gaming. Hmm, that' s odd. Perhaps it is, as we always say, a matter of taste.
This discussion, as intelligent as it may be, is completely pointless. Some of us prefers PC gaming, some of us prefer console gaming and some of us must have a little of both worlds.

While we have had a relatively mature debate we still haven' t reached a conclusion over which is best, and like most things here we never will as ultimately its horses for courses.

Like ginjirou, I sit in both camps, RTS are far better on PC, but I much prefer FPS on a console (just find controller far easier to use than keyboard/mous).

Reiteration: I was taking it upon myself to notify those who believe in certain lies about PC gaming that they were wrong. This has to do with, " lack of good games available in comparison to consoles," and, " constantly upgrading high end machinery" which were summarily shot down by objective sources of information such as MetaCritic.

I' m not interested in person X' s preference, and their opinion on this thread is not needed as far as my argument is concerned.

So why doesn' t someone create a poll.

2 choices Console as platform of choice or PC.

Simple isn' t it.

BTW Don' t Pee on billy still waiting on your machine spec from 4 years ago that runs Stalker at high settings today.

And your arguments were accepted by most. However the original thread was asking whether people thought the PC was the best games machine, and was therefore seeking people' s opinions. So does the PC have more games than any other platform, yes; if you want to keep pace with the latest games will it cost you, yes, but not your life' s savings; but which do I prefer to game on, console beats PC most of the time.

Look, i think i understand what Billy is saying.

He is not looking on personal preferences to determining which platform is better, because its obvious already consoles currently would have that title. He is trying to argue purely on the merits of each platform, regardless of preference and price considerations. Considering those factors (games, variety, modding, online, multimedia, applications, upgradability etc) i agree with him on almost all accounts. Look even consoles are trying to add PC functionality (ps3 with linux).

I think that no PC can provide state-of-the-art visuals after 3 years. But in the same vein console graphics wouldn' t even come close either (to PC visuals after 3 years). The idea that PC gamers have to constantly upgrade to continue to have the latest high end graphics (& therefore costing more) and yet consoles gamers don' t upgrade at all is ridiculous. This is mainly because console graphics do not improve at the exponential way PC games do. Also should the PC gamer feel the need to upgrade in 3 years time (as opposed to consoles that upgrade every 4-5 years) then the console would look positively obsolete by the upgraded PC, so even though the exercise is expensive, the PC is already in a different graphical class to the console. Its all a matter of perspective.

BTW This comment is in no way meant to sway personal opinion. If you prefer console/PC gaming thats your decision.

BTW Don' t Pee on billy still waiting on your machine spec from 4 years ago that runs Stalker at high settings today.

It' s a vicious PC paladin. viciouspc.com

They should offer hardware customization for consoles. Not everyone is poor and can only afford just the $400-600 machines. If I had the option to pay $1000 for an addon for a console that let me double the frame rate and quadruple the texture quality of games over the " base" console model, I would buy it.

If the Wii was only capable of 480i, it would have to be deinterlace it. - Emotep

Learn to use proper English. - Emotep

I have an American kid failing Geography. - Emotep

But then they' d be PCs. The whole point of consoles is simplicity, mass markets where everyone can have the same thing. Equality is a beautiful thing.

I think the advantage of consoles, from the 70s through the 90s, used to be that they were so much more stable. Games had to be solid out the gate because they had no way to be patched. Now with online functionality console programmers can be just as sloppy as PC programmers.

PC modding isn' t hard at all, you tend to get SDK' s with most games these days, it was harder in the mid to late 90' s granted but once companies realised what was going on they welcomed it with open arms.

Billy you have proved nothing with your megacritic scores, reviews mean jack shit, A crap game can get a high 80' s low 90' s score, if the releases that week or month happen to be on the slow side, or if the reviewer happens to get a nice freebie or 2 from the dev house, reviews are as biased as they come, games sell if they are in a particular genre that you the consumer enjoy.

Like I said at the beginning of this thread. Gamer.TV also say that the Wii is the best console, the same way they said the 360 was and the PS3 was oh and the PSP was and the DS was, I think you get my drift.

There are games that a PC is better at playing at the moment, but once control systems are researched and improved on the consoles then, the PC will not be so superior to the console in that respect, however for sports sims,FPS,driving games,sandbox games, then the PC is no way a better platform, the PC becomes cumbersome with the number of keystrokes required to do a move or a jump. The console is as people have reiterated in this thread, is simple and that what people tend to want these days.

Billy you have proved nothing with your megacritic scores, reviews mean jack shit, A crap game can get a high 80' s low 90' s score, if the releases that week or month happen to be on the slow side, or if the reviewer happens to get a nice freebie or 2 from the dev house, reviews are as biased as they come, games sell if they are in a particular genre that you the consumer enjoy.

Reviews mean media acceptance, which is apparently the most important thing that can happen to a video game. In any case, Metacritic also proves that more PC games are coming out, and more kinds of video games are coming out. More games + More kinds of games = Larger amount of good games.

There are games that a PC is better at playing at the moment, but once control systems are researched and improved on the consoles then, the PC will not be so superior to the console in that respect, however for sports sims,FPS,driving games,sandbox games, then the PC is no way a better platform, the PC becomes cumbersome with the number of keystrokes required to do a move or a jump. The console is as people have reiterated in this thread, is simple and that what people tend to want these days.

Okay, sure, your objective opinion has permanently changed my mind on the matter. Good job.

Consoles are simple. I guess that' s why Billy doesn' t seem to understand why a console in some ways are better as games machines. Billy is not a simple person. He makes everything uneccesarily complicated. Just like PC' s.

Please don' t have recourse with me in the future, I can tell you' re way too insufficient for dialogue.

Just stop, you' re trying to be intelligent but come across as a pompous idiot who doesnt even know the meaning of what he' s saying.

You' re exact statement was along the lines of " those games are a dime a dozen on console(s)." . You said that talking about good racing games, then you went on to mention a few racing games for PC that are also on console. What did you prove? That PC has a few good racing games, and consoles have more, and the best (GT, Forza).

Way to go and make yourself look stupid.

I dont want to celebrate, I want to sell you hate.

Spent a good wedge on my PC a couple of years back because I wanted to play HL2 at high settings. The problem with PC gaming is that the amount of decent games available don' t justify the cash outlay (not for me anyway) - it just feels like a bottomless pit for your cash a lot of the time.

Also, the advent of HD console games took away a lot of the unique appeal PC games had for me - and I' ve never gotten into RTS games.

I should add that PC gaming always becomes more appealing for me towards the end of a console generation when the consoles are starting to look weak.

Just stop, you' re trying to be intelligent but come across as a pompous idiot who doesnt even know the meaning of what he' s saying. .

Right, caught me, this is all an act meant to feign intelligence on a fucking third rate forum for video games.

You' re exact statement was along the lines of " those games are a dime a dozen on console(s)." . You said that talking about good racing games, then you went on to mention a few racing games for PC that are also on console. What did you prove? That PC has a few good racing games, and consoles have more, and the best (GT, Forza).

Wow, you are really fucking dense. I was responding to somebody who said that the PC didn' t have racing games. The PC does, of course. The fact that consoles have the " best" racers means nothing. I was speaking generally, the PC platform has the most amount of games, therefore the highest quality/most diverse. The nature of the platform makes it even more susceptible to creativity.

The fact that the consoles may have an upper hand in one genre (racing, 3D fighting, Turn based RPG) means nothing in the scheme of the big picture. The PC has the most, period, and the largest amount of good games, period. This was, as I reiterate yet again, to counter the idiot notion that the PC didn' t have any good games, or the same amount of quality games.

Way to go and make yourself look stupid.

You' ve said nothing in this post to indicate that you said something that " got" me or a point I made. So, you are telling yourself that I' m stupid in your head without any logical reasons as to why.

Don' t pretend like you know what the shit is, cause' you don' t. Your posts are lacking in coherence as well as content. You haven' t said anything in this entire thread that wasn' t completely a result of determined ignorance. Everything you' ve said has been trash.

was speaking generally, the PC platform has the most amount of games, therefore the highest quality/most diverse. The nature of the platform makes it even more susceptible to creativity.

It may or may not be true that due to sheer volume the PC, I suppose by the law of averages, would have the highest quality games, but I think this is essentially a qualitative judgment and not something that can be definitively proven. For the sheer enjoyment of asserting an opinion I' d say that every platform, in its lifespan, usually ends up having only a handful of truly great games -- games that are historically important for having advanced the art and science of game design. But because PCs are pieced together I' m not sure how you could compare them one-to-one with consoles (which have clearly delineated " generations" ).

As a platform, the PC does have the advantage of being much more accessible to indie developers and small teams, even individuals, who can make innovative games that would be too cost prohibitive for consoles. I don' t expect XNA to really change this scenario much, although it will be interesting to see what student teams at game design universities are able to produce for consoles.

But anyway, back to indie game development for PCs -- in my experience, having posted and updated detailed threads on the Independent Games Festival, only one forum member here has even responded to these posts. The vast majority of gamers on this forum only pay attention to big-budget console games which are handed to them on a silver platter via 5, 6 and 7-digit advertising campaigns.

So in my observation you can continue banging your head against a wall of indifference if you enjoy it here, but it would be more interesting if you dial back the aggression and frustration factor in your demeanor because it just makes you seem like you' re suffering from PMS and/or dehydration. This thread is interesting but I can' t understand why people take it so personally when others don' t share their preferences. I look forward to a return to discussion about the content of games rather than arguments about tech specs which cannot be resolved.

It may or may not be true that due to sheer volume the PC, I suppose by the law of averages, would have the highest quality games, but I think this is essentially a qualitative judgment and not something that can be definitively proven.

Well, right, it' s all subjective when we react to that level. But, as people in this thread have stated (unfortunately) as if it were fact, that the PC doesn' t have the amount of good games as the consoles do. MC combines opinions into useable scores, MC says otherwise.

On an objective level, it is impossible to say that the PC doesn' t have the largest amount of good games, doesn' t have any good games currently, or doesn' t have any good games in the future. Impossible.

For the sheer enjoyment of asserting an opinion I' d say that every platform, in its lifespan, usually ends up having only a handful of truly great games -- games that are historically important for having advanced the art and science of game design.

I' d say this is accurate. The only next generation game for a console that fits into what you said is GEOW, and it doesn' t look like that will be topped anytime soon.

But because PCs are pieced together I' m not sure how you could compare them one-to-one with consoles (which have clearly delineated " generations" ).

Game genres typically have generations, though it' s not easily defined nor as important, in my mind.

As a platform, the PC does have the advantage of being much more accessible to indie developers and small teams, even individuals, who can make innovative games that would be too cost prohibitive for consoles.

Exactly, that' s why I have problems with people saying that the PC doesn' t compare to the consoles game wise.

I don' t expect XNA to really change this scenario much, although it will be interesting to see what student teams at game design universities are able to produce for consoles.

XNA is a start, and it' s usually (don' t ask me to back this up) student teams at game design universities who create the best indie games. However, I doubt XNA will be a real platform for creating and distributing games. That said, time is the king shit of this domain, and I' m merely an irrelevant tool.

I' d say this is accurate. The only next generation game for a console that fits into what you said is GEOW, and it doesn' t look like that will be topped anytime soon.

Gears of War - good game with pretty graphics but doesn' t offer anything new. Hardly a game that breaks new ground.

I' m merely an irrelevant tool.

You said it!

As a platform, the PC does have the advantage of being much more accessible to indie developers and small teams, even individuals, who can make innovative games that would be too cost prohibitive for consoles.

Exactly, that' s why I have problems with people saying that the PC doesn' t compare to the consoles game wise.

I agree. I have to say though, that the innovative title that I' m most looking forward too is LittleBigPlanet! I admit, that could be due in part to the fact that other small indie games coming out don' t get as much attention payed to them, but regardless, I' m still really anticipating that game.