i dont know if this is the right place, but move it later

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

But consoles are still infinitely cheaper

no.

I agree with Tyrong.

When a game is released on a console you can play it, imo.
When a game is released on a PC you might not, well you can play it but the experience could be half baked as you could play it ONLY on everything low setting, which I find total bullshit.

On a PC you gotta upgrade your shit every few years, very annoying.
And on a console the games can be either looking like shit or looking like gold shit which you will shit brix cuz its damn beautifull to look at.

And ofcourse I find a PC wayyyyy better to play on for RTS and FPS, though some FPS on the console are fine enough to play on. But games like racing or third person shooters or sandbox games(like Assassin's Creed or GTA) I prefer the console, or ofcourse beat em up games.

I have spent about as much money upgrading my PC over the last years as on consoles, perhaps even a little less.

Yes, you have to upgrade the PC as new and better games come out (and actually simply as everything related to computer keeps evolving) however it would be fair to say that you also have to upgrade your console by buying a new one as new games come out.

I could well just have a PC, which I need for something else aside gaming, upgrade it every 4-5 years and I'd have my gaming needs sufficed while spending a lot less than on consoles. Also, as far as I've noticed most good games for PC are cheaper than those for consoles so all in all a PC gamer ends up spending less than a Console gamer.

As for requirements' issues, well, I think it's matter of upgrading your PC with a "security threshold" - you upgrade it to a certain extent, aware of the kind of games it will be able to support and with which quality and then just simply wait until it's convinient for you to upgrade again.

Else, I believe patches and mods and such are far easier to get for PC games than for Console games.

And also, for those who do not give a damn about copyright laws (that goes mainly for Chinese, Russians and Mexicans) there's piracy which in PC is far easier to perform and with potentially less risks on PC than on a Console (while you may have to even modify your console's hardware to actually read "pirate Discs" and may potentially lose multiplayer functions, on PC these problems can be more easily solved or prevented).

Either way, it really all boils down to personal taste. I like more RTS, RTT, Management and Combat Simulation games most of which are more comfortable to play on PC with the exception of combat simulation games which, with the proper hardware can be equally comfortable to play on either platform.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Yes, you have to upgrade the PC as new and better games come out (and actually simply as everything related to computer keeps evolving) however it would be fair to say that you also have to upgrade your console by buying a new one as new games come out.

Console's take alot of time when upgrading to another. And usually when a new consoles come's games are still being made for the old one's (game's are still made for the Ps2), and there isn't coming a new xbox,playstation or wii for the next 5 years or so, as they stated. And since consoles are extremely cheap now adays, you could better get a console then a PC.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

I could well just have a PC, which I need for something else aside gaming, upgrade it every 4-5 years and I'd have my gaming needs sufficed while spending a lot less than on consoles. Also, as far as I've noticed most good games for PC are cheaper than those for consoles so all in all a PC gamer ends up spending less than a Console gamer.

Yes mostly new games for the PC are 10 bucks cheaper or so, only 10 bucks that doesn't mean that you spend so much less cuz a good gaming PC is about over 1000 euro's if you want to first begin with a good one, and if you just wanna upgrade(Good proccecor, graphic card etc) you're mostly over the 300, consoles are cheaper. Plus console's get alot of exclusives, while RTS still dominates on PC there are not that many exclusives on the PC other then RTS.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

As for requirements' issues, well, I think it's matter of upgrading your PC with a "security threshold" - you upgrade it to a certain extent, aware of the kind of games it will be able to support and with which quality and then just simply wait until it's convinient for you to upgrade again.

Its pain when you upgrade your pc and it can't play a game, sucks for me, I would fucking hate that, oh look a console that can play everything for the console, yay.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Else, I believe patches and mods and such are far easier to get for PC games than for Console games.

Mods is obvious. Patches, that depends there are some patches out for console games just installed as easily as PC's if you're connected online with your console you can get it, aswell much content.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

And also, for those who do not give a damn about copyright laws (that goes mainly for Chinese, Russians and Mexicans) there's piracy which in PC is far easier to perform and with potentially less risks on PC than on a Console (while you may have to even modify your console's hardware to actually read "pirate Discs" and may potentially lose multiplayer functions, on PC these problems can be more easily solved or prevented).

That's why devolpers don't make alot of games for PC anymore, that is why PC gaming is half dead, piracy. And durrrr ofcourse its better to download shit on your pc.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Either way, it really all boils down to personal taste. I like more RTS, RTT, Management and Combat Simulation games most of which are more comfortable to play on PC with the exception of combat simulation games which, with the proper hardware can be equally comfortable to play on either platform.

Pretty much, if you're a die hard RTS fan you should play it on the PC, for combat simulation I'd think I rather go with a console for that. So yea it comes down to personal taste.

Also if you want to play co-op with a IRL friend you can do it on a console, which I find more then fun when doing co op online, while on a PC you can not, sure you can go online but you can go online with a console too.

Quote :

no

Yes.

Quote :

Yes, you have to upgrade the PC as new and better games come out (and actually simply as everything related to computer keeps evolving) however it would be fair to say that you also have to upgrade your console by buying a new one as new games come out.

This is true, but it's still overall cheaper. And not to mention easier.

Quote :

Also, as far as I've noticed most good games for PC are cheaper than those for consoles so all in all a PC gamer ends up spending less than a Console gamer.

Actually this is true. Ten bucks. It's bullshit. But that ten is more than made up for in total upgrades for the PC.

Quote :

aware of the kind of games it will be able to support and with which quality and then just simply wait until it's convinient for you to upgrade again.

I mean compatibility. This game will not work with this sound card IF you have this kind of video card. It's rare nowadays, but still happens.

Quote :

Else, I believe patches and mods and such are far easier to get for PC games than for Console games.

Patches no. Thanks to consoles having the internet, all you have to do is hook it up. No patches that I know of you have to pay for.

Quote :

And also, for those who do not give a damn about copyright laws (that goes mainly for Chinese, Russians and Mexicans) there's piracy which in PC is far easier to perform and with potentially less risks on PC than on a Console (while you may have to even modify your console's hardware to actually read "pirate Discs" and may potentially lose multiplayer functions, on PC these problems can be more easily solved or prevented).

Which hurts developers.

Quote :

Either way, it really all boils down to personal taste. I like more RTS, RTT, Management and Combat Simulation games most of which are more comfortable to play on PC with the exception of combat simulation games which, with the proper hardware can be equally comfortable to play on either platform.

No argument here. RTS CAN be dion o console, as Halo Wars and BAttle For Middle Earth 2 prooved, but if we had a choice we'd prefer never seeing one on console again.

Quote :

for combat simulation I'd think I rather go with a console for that.

Combat SIMULATION? Mouse and keyboard I find better.

CoolKidX wrote:

Console's take alot of time when upgrading to another. And usually when a new consoles come's games are still being made for the old one's (game's are still made for the Ps2), and there isn't coming a new xbox,playstation or wii for the next 5 years or so, as they stated. And since consoles are extremely cheap now adays, you could better get a console then a PC.

Well, I guess there are a lot of variables in regards to this and it's not necesarily something general.

While for time periods between console upgrades I agree, it's not like such periods cannot satisfactorily be kept with PCs too. I have been upgrading my PCs in 4 year intervals and the upgrades, aside from being quite beneficial for gaming, they've been quite useful for lots of other things too. With some good knowledge and economic capabilities, you can make PC upgrades to last well beyond 4-5 years.

As for price, well, I wouldn't be that sure. Take for example the PS3. When it came out it was twice as expensive as it would have been to nearly double my PC's capabilities. It was about 100 dollars more expensive than a lot of brand-new PCs with quite good capabilities.

The Wii was as expensive as it would have been upgrading my PC to satisfactory standards by thed time it went out (Honestly my brother and I got the Wii because of Zelda and SSBB, I guess I'm fan enough of them).

As for the Xbox 360, at leas the Elite version was one and a half times as expensive as it would have been upgrading my PC.

So definitely it's not a general rule that Consoles will be, at least much cheaper than upgrading PCs.

CKX wrote:

Yes mostly new games for the PC are 10 bucks cheaper or so, only 10 bucks that doesn't mean that you spend so much less

TK wrote:

Actually this is true. Ten bucks. It's bullshit. But that ten is more than made up for in total upgrades for the PC.

I don't know about the games you like, but, about the games I like their retail price is nearly a 3rd and often half of that of the average console game.

For example here several games that I like (RTSs and management games mostly) are between 16 to 20 Euros. Now lets compare to Halo Wars, another RTS but for console, which costs 56 Euros. Combat Simulations for example ARMA or Lock-On for PC which cost not even 20 Euros (last I checked) compared to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (which I want to get) which here costs 68 Euro.

Indeed it would be perhaps fair to compare the same game on both platforms, but I think it's equally valid to compare exclusives with exclusives.

CKX wrote:

cuz a good gaming PC is about over 1000 euro's if you want to first begin with a good one, and if you just wanna upgrade(Good proccecor, graphic card etc) you're mostly over the 300,

Holy crap on a cracker! Here having what I'd consider an excellent gaming PC with good graphic card, memory, processor etc. can cost you 500-600 (in fact that's as much as what getting my new PC this winter will cost, and I'll have already two PCs [one to screw up with for my Engineering career as a test bed for progamming and such shit, and other for gaming and personal stuff] all for about 600 Euro).

[quote="CKX]
consoles are cheaper.[/quote]

Point adressed above.

CKX wrote:

Plus console's get alot of exclusives, while RTS still dominates on PC there are not that many exclusives on the PC other then RTS.

True, which is why I mention personal taste as a determinant factor.

CKX wrote:

Its pain when you upgrade your pc and it can't play a game, sucks for me, I would fucking hate that, oh look a console that can play everything for the console, yay.

I definitely hear you on that, I've had to deal with that for 11 years now but not only have I got used to it and become slightly proficient coping with the situation, it's something I simply can't avoid as 90% of the games I like are for PC.

CKX wrote:

Mods is obvious. Patches, that depends there are some patches out for console games just installed as easily as PC's if you're connected online with your console you can get it, aswell much content.

Agreed.

CKX wrote:

That's why devolpers don't make alot of games for PC anymore, that is why PC gaming is half dead, piracy. And durrrr ofcourse its better to download shit on your pc.

In many senses I believe it's what has kept the prices of several games from rising. But well, talking about prices and piracy necessarily requires an assesment of how economy works. We have a flawed economy which will make distribution and acquisition of goods prortionally flawed.

CKX wrote:

Pretty much, if you're a die hard RTS fan you should play it on the PC, for combat simulation I'd think I rather go with a console for that. So yea it comes down to personal taste.

RTS part, yes. Combat Simulation, it depends. As I said, I believe that with the proper hardware the experience can be as comfortable on console as it is on PC.

Now, and refering to what Tyrong says, in some cases I do pretty much prefer the keyboard and mouse in others, like combat flight simulators, I wouldn't play them without a joystick (ah damn I need so much someone to use mine... yeah, unavoidable with the word "joystick").

CKX wrote:

Also if you want to play co-op with a IRL friend you can do it on a console, which I find more then fun when doing co op online, while on a PC you can not, sure you can go online but you can go online with a console too.

Actually this is not necesarily true. Most of my co-op and/or multiplayer games on PC lately have been playing AoM with my brother. He brings his laptop to my room and we play together IRL. Also a couple of years ago a friend of mine organized an Age of Empires tournament on a cybercafe she owns so we all pretty much played IRL.

The same would apply for any other game with multiplayer capabilities.

TK wrote:

This is true, but it's still overall cheaper. And not to mention easier.

Cheaper, not necessarily as I've explained above. Easier - no doubt.

TK wrote:

I mean compatibility. This game will not work with this sound card IF you have this kind of video card. It's rare nowadays, but still happens.

That's why you check your game needs and the hardware and software available. Which, brings us back to your point that in the case of consoles it's easier.

TK wrote:

Patches no. Thanks to consoles having the internet, all you have to do is hook it up. No patches that I know of you have to pay for

True.

TK wrote:

Which hurts developers.

And forces prices to be lowered. Besides in some cases I haven't been able to get the original game and I've been forced to get it through piracy.


I really can't imagine myself playing even half of the games I like on console, I don't think the interface would be comfortable at all.

Quote :

Take for example the PS3

There's a reason they got their asses handed to them in those first years.

Quote :

Zelda

Bugs pinching you all over.

Quote :

As for the Xbox 360, at leas the Elite version

The elite is the weakest selling of the three.

Quote :

I don't know about the games you like, but, about the games I like their retail price is nearly a 3rd and often half of that of the average console game.

Not being rude, but are your games perhaps generally considered budget?

Quote :

all for about 600 Euro

WOW Europe is cheap. I can almost feel the thorned cock we get, now.

Quote :

I definitely hear you on that, I've had to deal with that for 11 years now but not only have I got used to it and become slightly proficient coping with the situation, it's something I simply can't avoid as 90% of the games I like are for PC.

I don't wanna have to cope with it or get used to it.

Quote :

As I said, I believe that with the proper hardware the experience can be as comfortable on console as it is on PC.

Indeed, but they'd have to cater to thos WITHOUT that hardwars as well. It complicates things. Especially when you bring a keyboard into a controller system. Controllers have 20ish buttons in total. More if some are alternate modes. But keyboards have MANY more. Thus controller users will get gypped. A good example is, of course, RTSs.

Quote :

I really can't imagine myself playing even half of the games I like on console, I don't think the interface would be comfortable at all.

We don;t WANT those games on the console. I mean, we've been burned badly before. Starcraft 64, anyone? (Shudders.)

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

Quote :

Take for example the PS3

There's a reason they got their asses handed to them in those first years.

Quote :

As for the Xbox 360, at leas the Elite version

The elite is the weakest selling of the three.

And still we're not really talking about the market success of x or y console but of consoles as a whole against PCs, my point was simply that not all consoles are cheaper. Apparently, it'd be almost fair to say that the commercial success of gaming platforms is inversely proportional to their technical capabilities.

TK wrote:

Quote :

Zelda

Bugs pinching you all over.

Well... yeah.

TK wrote:

Quote :

I don't know about the games you like, but, about the games I like their retail price is nearly a 3rd and often half of that of the average console game.

Not being rude, but are your games perhaps generally considered budget?

Well there are some reasons why the games I like tend to be cheaper:
1. They've been on the market for a handful of years (they tend to be 3-5 years old).
2. Mexico occupies the 3rd place on piracy of the world (China being 1st and Russia 2nd) which forces prices to be shortened, specially since some of the games I like are not only to be sold in Mexico but also are partially developed in Russia (they can't be expensive or no one will buy them).
3. They tend to have small fan bases, that is, they have a small target market. While one would assume that the less buyers the greater the price should be, on the other hand since they don't have so many potential buyers they certainly don't want to scare away with high prices the relatively few potential buyers they have.
4. They tend to be from independent small developers, not megacorps like Microsoft.


[quote="TK"]

Quote :

all for about 600 Euro

WOW Europe is cheap. I can almost feel the thorned cock we get, now.[/qote]

Actually it's Mexico, I just said in Euros so Marnix wouldn't have to make the conversion and for proportions to be more clear. Apparently computer stuff is ineed cheaper here than it is Europe.

TK wrote:

I don't wanna have to cope with it or get used to it.

And I have to and not only that, within the following years (supposing I don't die anytime soon) I'll have to develop proficiency in computer making and programming so eventually I'll be able to actively modify my coputer, perhaps fix glitches and such and certainly even cut costs by at least 30% making my PC upgrading as affordable as console upgrading.

TK wrote:

Indeed, but they'd have to cater to thos WITHOUT that hardwars as well. It complicates things. Especially when you bring a keyboard into a controller system. Controllers have 20ish buttons in total. More if some are alternate modes. But keyboards have MANY more. Thus controller users will get gypped. A good example is, of course, RTSs.

That's why I refered mainly to the Combat Simulation genre.

TK wrote:

We don;t WANT those games on the console. I mean, we've been burned badly before. Starcraft 64, anyone? (Shudders.)

Starcraft on 64? Are you serious? Wow...

Quote :

Well... yeah.

I mean, what the hell were they thinking with that line?

Quote :

1. They've been on the market for a handful of years (they tend to be 3-5 years old).

Well THAT"S not a proper showing of price. They all go down significantly after that.

Quote :

3. They tend to have small fan bases, that is, they have a small target market.

That's likely. Sim games tend to have the smaller market.

Quote :

4. They tend to be from independent small developers, not megacorps like Microsoft.

In other words they tend to be considered budget games.

Quote :

Starcraft on 64? Are you serious? Wow...

Dude, you have NO idea. There's a reason we hate RTSs on consoles.

http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/n64/home/198791.html

(Cries.)

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

Quote :

Well... yeah.

I mean, what the hell were they thinking with that line?

As a kid I was impacted a lot by Zelda which makes me want to get Zelda games badly.

TK wrote:

Quote :

1. They've been on the market for a handful of years (they tend to be 3-5 years old).

Well THAT"S not a proper showing of price. They all go down significantly after that.

But they definitely have a limit - they'll hardly drop to 20 or even 50% of their original price. One notable example is Age of Empires III. It's been already in the market for some while and here its price has dropped less than 8 US dollars.

TK wrote:

Quote :

4. They tend to be from independent small developers, not megacorps like Microsoft.

In other words they tend to be considered budget games.

Well if that's the definition of "budget game"...

TK wrote:

Quote :

Starcraft on 64? Are you serious? Wow...

Dude, you have NO idea. There's a reason we hate RTSs on consoles.

http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/n64/home/198791.html

(Cries.)

Ugh... seriously who thougt RTSs were a good idea on consoles? Perhaps they'd also start selling keyboards and mouses for consoles...

They have been selling analog controllers for PC for quite a while....

alexCCCP-RUS-54321 wrote:

They have been selling analog controllers for PC for quite a while....

So?

Quote :

As a kid I was impacted a lot by Zelda which makes me want to get Zelda games badly.

Ocarina is THE title that made me a harcore gamer.

Quote :

But they definitely have a limit - they'll hardly drop to 20 or even 50% of their original price. One notable example is Age of Empires III. It's been already in the market for some while and here its price has dropped less than 8 US dollars.

Here they start at 60 and always drop to 20 later on. Assuming they're still in print, of course.

Quote :

Well if that's the definition of "budget game"...

Not having the funds that AAA's have? Yes. Not that I'm shitting on budget games! They can be VERY good. They usually suck, but they CAN be great!

Quote :

Ugh... seriously who thougt RTSs were a good idea on consoles? Perhaps they'd also start selling keyboards and mouses for consoles...

As I understand the PS3 comes with one, and they do for 360. Just nobody sells them.

But you don;t understan the suckyness f that game, not until you've tried it. Has anyone here done so? Cool? Liche?

Quote :

They have been selling analog controllers for PC for quite a while....

And theyhave fewer options than keyboard.

HOLD ZE PRESSES.

Anyways, the RTS Halo Wars on X360 looks pretty good since its more for consoles (so less economic shit or something), so it could work for some.

And Ps3 is catching up cuz people love to buy a Ps3 slim without games with it for 300 euro while you can get a xbox elite for 250(euro that is) with Pure and Lego Batman(yea yea) BUT with a new game like MW2 or forza 3 I mean shit a xbox elite with three games BUT you can get a xbox elite with FOUR games and a controller for 300 bucks I mean shit, crazy new ps3 owners.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

Quote :

As a kid I was impacted a lot by Zelda which makes me want to get Zelda games badly.

Ocarina is THE title that made me a harcore gamer.

I'm not a hardcore gamer but certainly what started my interest in compuer games were a not so bad game called Chaos Island (a game based on Jurassic Park: The Lost World [since I was 4 years to when I was 11 years old I was a dinosaur nerd]) and several demos that came on CDs in PC gaming magazines. Eventually I'd get the full versions of those games, mainly AoE and some combat simulators.

As for Zelda, Ocarina of Time made me a slight fan of the series and so far I got the feeling that no Zelda title has been able to reach or exceed the sensation Ocarina of time made me experience. I guess we discussed this somewhere else already...

TK wrote:

Here they start at 60 and always drop to 20 later on. Assuming they're still in print, of course.

Evidence indicates that such a trend also exists in USA which is why I go shopping there.

TK wrote:

Quote :

Well if that's the definition of "budget game"...

Not having the funds that AAA's have? Yes. Not that I'm shitting on budget games! They can be VERY good. They usually suck, but they CAN be great!

Actually I'd dare to say that the "budget games" I like are actually very good both in gameplay and technical properties, in fact some of them are technically pretty demanding.

TK wrote:

As I understand the PS3 comes with one, and they do for 360. Just nobody sells them.

But you don;t understan the suckyness f that game, not until you've tried it. Has anyone here done so? Cool? Liche?

As it can be infered I haven't tried it but I certainly don't feel like doing so either...

Well if you define one of those QWERTY messaging pads for consoles a keyboard, technikly, they're selling keyboards for consoles.