Forget John Romero - XBox360 and PS3 ARE *Doomed*

[DAPUNISHER]

The gaming industry is growing in every sector, though with the PC segment, it is difficult to know exactly, as it seems the numbers never include downloadable content. If anyone has a link to total sales figures that do, TIA. Because, with that stat missing, PC game sales are still below 2004 numbers.

As to the prediction that the PC platform will dominate in the not-so-distant-future, that may be a semantic argument. That is, it would probably be a convergence device, and screaming NIKE! for either platform would be debatable in its accuracy.

Technology is the quintessential example of the addage "The only thing that remains the same, is that things will change." Where gaming in the home is concerned, I think the change will blur the distinctions currently made between consoles and PCs, rendering any discussion concerning which platform has the "longest legs" largely moot. They both have strengths and weaknesses, and leveraging the strengths of both, developing new capabilities, and 86'in as many of the weaknesses as possible, seems a logical path to follow.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

I agree. And Sony has been getting some sh!t for pricing their console at $599. But let me tell you, when you start talking about DX10 and quad core gaming, $599 is a drop in the bucket compared to it's PC counterpart. Sh!t, like Todd33 said, you even get a Blu-Ray player with it. A Blu-Ray player ALONE for a PC is $600+.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: ZimZum


Perhaps on the day that I can buy a $400 PC that can play every game available without issues and last me 4-5 years. And not be obsolete by the end of its lifespan. But I just don't see that day coming very soon. Video cards alone still will be more expensive than entire consoles. With consumers balking at paying $500 for PS3s , where does that Leave a Gaming PC rig that will cost at least twice as much and have a useful lifespan 1/4th as long?

I don't think you can overstate that point. The PS2 has been out for a very long time, yet it still sells well due to pricing, a vast game library, and fun new titles like the Guitar Hero and God of War series. GoW2 looks very good considering the hardware it is played on. Take a PC from that era, and try to play the latest PC titles....

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Todd33

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

I agree. And Sony has been getting some sh!t for pricing their console at $599. But let me tell you, when you start talking about DX10 and quad core gaming, $599 is a drop in the bucket compared to it's PC counterpart. Sh!t, like Todd33 said, you even get a Blu-Ray player with it. A Blu-Ray player ALONE for a PC is $600+.

We also haven't seen the PS3 or 360 have the hardware in them fully utilized either, so again, like the PS2, the best is likely yet to come.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Todd33

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

I agree. And Sony has been getting some sh!t for pricing their console at $599. But let me tell you, when you start talking about DX10 and quad core gaming, $599 is a drop in the bucket compared to it's PC counterpart. Sh!t, like Todd33 said, you even get a Blu-Ray player with it. A Blu-Ray player ALONE for a PC is $600+.

We also haven't seen the PS3 or 360 have the hardware in them fully utilized either, so again, like the PS2, the best is likely yet to come.

Exactly. And let me tell you, if Gears of War isn't utilizing the 360s full potential, we've got some exciting games ahead of us for the 360.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Questar

letsee what IS there besides multimedia and playing games?
... work

I feel sorry for you. Your world is a very small one.

please don't
i am quite certain it is ... has been ... will be ... bigger than yours

==============

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.[/quote]

you can run Vista on your PS3
:Q

i am impressed



youg guys completely miss JR's point ... not to mentione 'mine'

.. as usual

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: apoppin
you guys are completely missing Romero's point

... the console has *become* a PC ... with the exception of the Wii - which is a true "console" like the earlier consoles ... not some 'wannabe PC' that really isn't

the PC is *evolving* to become a truly wireless medium [as Gates envisioned] in every room ... the *center of entertainment* in the home

the Console *cannot* become that home entertainment system ... it is fated to sit next to the Big TV in the living room

otOH, With multicore poised revolutionize video HW -cheaply - it will make the PC do what consoles do right now ...

so where does that leave the consoles ... in say 5 years?

competing against a cheaper and wireless PC entertainment - in every room

it's a very possible future with the PC finally *winning*

In less then 5 years there will be another console. Consoles are here to stay.

 

[Sniper82]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Questar

letsee what IS there besides multimedia and playing games?
... work

I feel sorry for you. Your world is a very small one.

please don't
i am quite certain it is ... has been ... will be ... bigger than yours

==============

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

you can run Vista on your PS3
:Q

i am impressed



youg guys completely miss JR's point ... not to mentione 'mine'

.. as usual[/quote]

I get your point. Just think JR's and yours is pointless.

Regardless the 360(definitely) and PS3(little iffy) aren't going anywhere for the next 4-5 years regardless of how much they are like a PC. In 4-6 years I would bet money we will see the new systems for each company and they will probably be even more like PC's. Nintendo might even jump aboard.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Sniper82

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Questar

letsee what IS there besides multimedia and playing games?
... work

I feel sorry for you. Your world is a very small one.

please don't
i am quite certain it is ... has been ... will be ... bigger than yours

==============

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

you can run Vista on your PS3
:Q

i am impressed



youg guys completely miss JR's point ... not to mentione 'mine'

.. as usual

I get your point. Just think JR's and yours is pointless.

Regardless the 360(definitely) and PS3(little iffy) aren't going anywhere for the next 4-5 years regardless of how much they are like a PC. In 4-6 years I would bet money we will see the new systems for each company and they will probably be even more like PC's. Nintendo might even jump aboard.[/quote]
i guess not ... mine is very different from JR's

do not confuse my "explaining" what he means with what *i believe*

are we even sure the PS3 is a success? i see them piled up in stores ... and they are already thinking of discounting them further
--otoh, the Wii is still hard to get

so that leaves ... what?

the xbox and Wii ...

well, scratch the Will ... it is pretty much a *success* as a "pure console" ... i think nintendo made the right choice ... a cheap machine to produce and cheap to sell and popular as hell ,,,

so then you just have the xbox and the PC

with MS trying to sell them both

now with HW getting much faster, games are now ready for multicore and the xbox tapped out as far as it can go for gfx, the PC just blows away the xbox in 08

that's only two years where the xbox is even 'close' to PC


MS better be working on the 720

next year you 360 users are gonna feel a little cold
--and wait for 3 more years if you can stand it.

and you are absolutely right MyStupidMouth, there will be another nextGen console in 5 years ... but will there be two platforms beside the PC? ...
i doubt 3

i *know* the PC is gonna be a gaming platform in 10 years
... Sony's may well be gone ... and nintendo back to its 'pure-console' roots

:beer:


and how important is that Blu-Ray player gonna be in your PS3 when it's less than $50 next year for the PC

HW is getting cheap ... the consoles are sill very expensive to produce ... and their R&D will get passed on to you - the console games

haven't you figured out *why* console games cost more than PC games?
:roll:

:laugh:

and it is gonna get more expensive for you guys

i thought you should know what dead end really means

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

That's all well and good, but what about the television to play that system on? Sure, you can get a junker for $100-$200, but if you're in the market for a PS3, I'd assume you'd want some form of HD, whether it be 720p or 1080p. Going cheap, that'd be about $400 for a display, so it makes the cost of a good PC vs. a gaming setup much closer.

You're also omitting the fact that Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, whereas we aren't purchasing our gaming PCs at a loss to the manufacturer. If we were...mmmm

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

That's all well and good, but what about the television to play that system on? Sure, you can get a junker for $100-$200, but if you're in the market for a PS3, I'd assume you'd want some form of HD, whether it be 720p or 1080p. Going cheap, that'd be about $400 for a display, so it makes the cost of a good PC vs. a gaming setup much closer.

You're also omitting the fact that Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, whereas we aren't purchasing our gaming PCs at a loss to the manufacturer. If we were...mmmm

You can also add that to a PC also.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

That's all well and good, but what about the television to play that system on? Sure, you can get a junker for $100-$200, but if you're in the market for a PS3, I'd assume you'd want some form of HD, whether it be 720p or 1080p. Going cheap, that'd be about $400 for a display, so it makes the cost of a good PC vs. a gaming setup much closer.

You're also omitting the fact that Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, whereas we aren't purchasing our gaming PCs at a loss to the manufacturer. If we were...mmmm

that Blu-Ray the only real ^feature^ in the PS3 is gonna be cheap HW and mainstream next year ... maybe fifty bucks

since i don't watch TV, i would *need* a big expensive LCD for my living room .. more like $700 + $600 for that PS3 ... you can get a really *nice* PC for that

next year, i expect to have at least a 22" WS monitor for my computer ... anyway ... and a 2nd 19" one

and i will watch TV and movies on it also .... not to mention view and file my tax forms
--that just might be a "business deduction" ... your PS3 certainly isn't

EIT: *wrong*, MyStupidMouth PC HW costs are NOT added to PC game prices.

ONLY in concoles do you get to pay for your PS3 or xbox - forever - in higher-priced games

100 games over the 5 life of your console is at least $1000 more than buying 100 PC games

don't *forget* to add in 'rent' to the manufacturer of your console
:Q

 

[Jules]

nvm done with this thread

 

[Matthias99]

the whole point is that *when* the PC get cheap and faster and wireless - as they are evolving - the consoles become less 'important' ... and when the PC's gfx *also* blow-away the consoles ...

where does that leave the consoles ... in say 5-10 years ?

If consoles stay along the current lines of being essentially cheap, mass-produced gaming-oriented PCs -- they'll be the same. PC gaming will get more console-like, and consoles will get more PC-like. Rather than developing for the XBox1080 and PS6 -- you'll write for DX12 (or OpenGL 5 and OpenAL, or whatever people come up with) and some standardized gaming OS that you can also run on a 'real' PC (either natively or in a VM) as long as it has compatiable hardware. Need a third-generation Cell processor for your physics engine? Drop one into the PC on a PCIe card and you're all set. Ideally the same binaries will run directly on a 'PC' or 'console', or require only minor porting (so you might buy one copy of a game that includes executables for all popular platforms, similar to how WoW comes with both Mac and PC clients).

It may take more than 10 years, but that's ultimately the direction I see things going in. So I guess I agree with Romero in the sense that purpose-built console hardware is probably going away, unless it's just a modified version of PC hardware -- which is already what both the PS3 and XBox360 are largely doing, and probably the Wii to some extent. If standalone 'consoles' survive, they'll be little more than limited, stripped-down PCs sold at a loss. But the idea of having a brain-dead simple gaming platform isn't going away. It saves development costs, and it makes it easier for people to use.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

That's all well and good, but what about the television to play that system on? Sure, you can get a junker for $100-$200, but if you're in the market for a PS3, I'd assume you'd want some form of HD, whether it be 720p or 1080p. Going cheap, that'd be about $400 for a display, so it makes the cost of a good PC vs. a gaming setup much closer.

You're also omitting the fact that Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, whereas we aren't purchasing our gaming PCs at a loss to the manufacturer. If we were...mmmm

Jesus, you don't add the cost of the TV when comparing a console. I know people LOVE to do this to make the price comparable, but that's simply not an accurate figure. When 99% of people buy an HDTV, they buy it for watching HDTV, HD movies and at a distant third, gaming. That would be like saying you also have to add the cost of the receiver, and speakers. Those components are already there and their main purpose if for something other than gaming. A console is just another way of making use of your existing HT equipment.

I'll do the same for a PC. MOST people use their PC for other things rather than gaming. So you should only compare the parts you'll need to upgrade if you wanted to play games. If you had a PC which consisted of a P4 3.0GHz CPU, 1GB of memory, and integrated video, most people even at AT would have no problems doing their normal everyday computing tasks. HOWEVER, since they DO want to play games, they'll have to buy a new CPU, more memory and DEFINITELY a new video card (or two), oh and yeah, a new motherboard, oh and look at that, now you need a new type of memory...oh wait, you need a new PSU now too. You've now just pretty much rebuilt your whole PC to play games. Yes, you can use it for other things, but you could have used your old machine for those things just fine.

Anyone that tries to pretend PC gaming is in the same league price wise as console gaming needs to get back to reality. PC gaming is much more expensive than console gaming. That's just a fact. It is also not as simple as just popping in a game and having it just play. If you buy an XBox 360/PS3/Wii game now or 3 years from now, it is guaranteed to run just about flawlessly when you get home. That is the beauty of console gaming, simplicity. And THAT is why is is doing so well.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

That's all well and good, but what about the television to play that system on? Sure, you can get a junker for $100-$200, but if you're in the market for a PS3, I'd assume you'd want some form of HD, whether it be 720p or 1080p. Going cheap, that'd be about $400 for a display, so it makes the cost of a good PC vs. a gaming setup much closer.

You're also omitting the fact that Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, whereas we aren't purchasing our gaming PCs at a loss to the manufacturer. If we were...mmmm

that Blu-Ray the only real ^feature^ in the PS3 is gonna be cheap HW and mainstream next year ... maybe fifty bucks

since i don't watch TV, i would *need* a big expensive LCD for my living room .. more like $700 + $600 for that PS3 ... you can get a really *nice* PC for that

Oh for Christ's sake, you are in the minority. 99.999% of the people's HDTV's main function is for watching HDTV and movies, NOT gaming. BUT, if you want to play it that way... You don't NEED a big expensive LCD for your living room. You get a Dell 24" LCD and share an XBox 360/PS3 with your PC. Now we can subtract the cost of the display from both (console and PC). Now what kind of crappy gaming PC can you build for $399? Whatever it is, it's going to get annihilated by the console.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

That's all well and good, but what about the television to play that system on? Sure, you can get a junker for $100-$200, but if you're in the market for a PS3, I'd assume you'd want some form of HD, whether it be 720p or 1080p. Going cheap, that'd be about $400 for a display, so it makes the cost of a good PC vs. a gaming setup much closer.

You're also omitting the fact that Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, whereas we aren't purchasing our gaming PCs at a loss to the manufacturer. If we were...mmmm

Jesus, you don't add the cost of the TV when comparing a console. I know people LOVE to do this to make the price comparable, but that's simply not an accurate figure. When 99% of people buy an HDTV, they buy it for watching HDTV, HD movies and at a distant third, gaming. That would be like saying you also have to add the cost of the receiver, and speakers. Those components are already there and their main purpose if for something other than gaming. A console is just another way of making use of your existing HT equipment.

I'll do the same for a PC. MOST people use their PC for other things rather than gaming. So you should only compare the parts you'll need to upgrade if you wanted to play games. If you had a PC which consisted of a P4 3.0GHz CPU, 1GB of memory, and integrated video, most people even at AT would have no problems doing their normal everyday computing tasks. HOWEVER, since they DO want to play games, they'll have to buy a new CPU, more memory and DEFINITELY a new video card (or two), oh and yeah, a new motherboard, oh and look at that, now you need a new type of memory...oh wait, you need a new PSU now too. You've now just pretty much rebuilt your whole PC to play games. Yes, you can use it for other things, but you could have used your old machine for those things just fine.

Anyone that tries to pretend PC gaming is in the same league price wise as console gaming needs to get back to reality. PC gaming is much more expensive than console gaming. That's just a fact. It is also not as simple as just popping in a game and having it just play. If you buy an XBox 360/PS3/Wii game now or 3 years from now, it is guaranteed to run just about flawlessly when you get home. That is the beauty of console gaming, simplicity. And THAT is why is is doing so well.

except when you figure that each console game you buy is priced $10 higher than their PC counterpart ... they are still getting an extra $1000 from you in not-so hidden costs

and you *do* have to factor in the 1080p display for your PS3 - if you are gonna count B;lu-Ray as a 'feature'

if not, don't count it ... it ill be fifty bucks, next year, anyway


and wtH do i want to *share* a PS3 wannabe PC with my PC?


when my PC already has everything the PS3 does plus better graphics capabilities

just different, sometimes 'exclusive' and more expensive games

if you want to play *those* games, then the PS3 is for you

as to games "Running Perfectly" ... shivering isles is for xbox360 also and has the same fatalgame-crashing bug ... if you don't patch it, down it goes.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: apoppin
except when you figure that each console game you buy is priced $10 higher than their PC counterpart ... they are still getting an extra $1000 from you in not-so hidden costs

I like how you just pulled $1000 out of thin air. That's 100 games. I've got 20 or so XBox games and most of them I bought for something like $29.99. So yeah, we're talking about $150 difference over a few years. SO let's stop with the exaggerations.

and you *do* have to factor in the 1080p display for your PS3 - if you are gonna count B;lu-Ray as a 'feature'

Why is that? You can connect it to teh Dell 24" and play Blu-Ray movies with no problem.

if not, don't count it ... it ill be fifty bucks, next year, anyway

No it won't. And I want to watch HD movies NOW, not next year. :roll:

and wtH do i want to *share* a PS3 wannabe PC with my PC?

WTF are you talking about? So you don't have to pay for an extra display. What do you game on a PC AND a console at the same time.

when my PC already has everything the PS3 does plus better graphics capabilities

just different, sometimes 'exclusive' and more expensive games

So your PC cost $599 and can play HD movies?

if you want to play *those* games, then the PS3 is for you

I don't have to make a choice. I enjoy teh best of BOTH worlds.

as to games "Running Perfectly" ... shivering isles is for xbox360 also and has the same fatalgame-crashing bug ... if you don't patch it, down it goes.

Oh my God, ONE GAME?! The horror. I wonder how hard you have work to patch it? Oh yeah, XBox live will take care of it for you in one shot. Quick and easy. Do you want me to go through the games that have issues with the PC that have problems inherent to the game and also compatibility issues with software loaded on a machine prior to installation, not to mention video drivers that need to be worked out. Oh yeah, what about when a new game comes out, you've got to make sure your machine meets at LEAST the recommended specs or you don't get to play it at all or you've got to turn the details WAY down.

Give me a break, if you're trying to argue gaming on a console for the average Joe is just as simple as gaming on a PC, you've completely lost touch with reality.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: apoppin
except when you figure that each console game you buy is priced $10 higher than their PC counterpart ... they are still getting an extra $1000 from you in not-so hidden costs

I like how you just pulled $1000 out of thin air. That's 100 games. I've got 20 or so XBox games and most of them I bought for something like $29.99. So yeah, we're talking about $150 difference over a few years. SO let's stop with the exaggerations.

IF you bothered to read my earlier post, i based it on 100 games over the 5-year life of your console. New console games are generally $10[+] dollars more than their PC counterparts ... and i mostly pay under $20 for relatively new '06 PC games [PREY/Pirates!/B&W2] ... sometimes as little as ten dollars for' 05 [Gun/Fable LC/Darwinia] and much less for pre'04 ... You DO pay more per each console game - on average TEN dollars more ... so *you* stop exaggerating

and you *do* have to factor in the 1080p display for your PS3 - if you are gonna count B;lu-Ray as a 'feature'

Why is that? You can connect it to teh Dell 24" and play Blu-Ray movies with no problem.

if not, don't count it ... it ill be fifty bucks, next year, anyway

No it won't. And I want to watch HD movies NOW, not next year. :roll:[/quote] then you have a $600 blu ray player that can't be upgraded ... you can have the premium price for the movies too ... after all you don't mind paying *extra* for console games

and wtH do i want to *share* a PS3 wannabe PC with my PC?

WTF are you talking about? So you don't have to pay for an extra display. What do you game on a PC AND a console at the same time.

when my PC already has everything the PS3 does plus better graphics capabilities

just different, sometimes 'exclusive' and more expensive games

So your PC cost $599 and can play HD movies?

if you want to play *those* games, then the PS3 is for you

I don't have to make a choice. I enjoy teh best of BOTH worlds.

Sure you do ... and you pay a *lot* more for that 'privilege

as to games "Running Perfectly" ... shivering isles is for xbox360 also and has the same fatalgame-crashing bug ... if you don't patch it, down it goes.

Oh my God, ONE GAME?! The horror. I wonder how hard you have work to patch it? Oh yeah, XBox live will take care of it for you in one shot. Quick and easy. Do you want me to go through the games that have issues with the PC that have problems inherent to the game and also compatibility issues with software loaded on a machine prior to installation, not to mention video drivers that need to be worked out. Oh yeah, what about when a new game comes out, you've got to make sure your machine meets at LEAST the recommended specs or you don't get to play it at all or you've got to turn the details WAY down.

Give me a break, if you're trying to argue gaming on a console for the average Joe is just as simple as gaming on a PC, you've completely lost touch with reality.[/quote]
You never had any touch with reality . ... your math is beyond 'fuzzy'. One game ... there are others ... you just got one very recent example ... average Joe is gonna have to *start over* with SI after 50 hours into the SI 360 game. He is gonna really like that ... otOH, my PC version is already patched .. i don't think there is even a beta patch for the 360 yet but a really convoluted workaround 'average joe' won't bother with

... and when a *new game* comes out for your console that *chugs*chugs*chugs* - in a few years - like the PS2 and xbox do now with their latest games ... you put up with it and pretend it is "fine"
:roll:

my last mini upgrade cost me 'net $300' - CPU/GPU/RAM - and i can play the very latest games with high detail ... my rig is well over 3 years old ... i upgraded *free* --on the "thirty" games i saved $10 each over buying consoles games ... over 3 years ... and i have another $300 already saved for next year's PC HW upgrade because i actually bought 60 PC games over 3 years ... instead of the more expensive console games
--and i got waay carried away with my upgrade ...

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: apoppin
IF you bothered to read my earlier post, i based it on 100 games over the 5-year life of your console. New console games are generally $10[+] dollars more than their PC counterparts ... and i mostly pay under $20 for relatively new '06 PC games [PREY/Pirates!/B&W2] ... sometimes as little as ten dollars for' 05 [Gun/Fable LC/Darwinia] and much less for pre'04 ... You DO pay more per each console game - on average TEN dollars more ... so *you* stop exaggerating

IF you bothered to read my earlier post, I have a grand total of ~20 games for my XBox that I got back in 2001. So yeah, cut the crap with the 100 games. Hey, if you base it on 1000 games for your console, you'll have $10,000 difference. Man, what a deal. :roll: If you are willing to wait for the price to drop like they do on PC games, you can also get the console games for pretty cheap. You also forgot to mention you can buy pre-owned games for consoles, you can't for PC.

then you have a $600 blu ray player that can't be upgraded ... you can have the premium price for the movies too ... after all you don't mind paying *extra* for console games

Man, your arguments are awful. Why would I want to "upgrade my console?" It will play all the games for it just fine for the life of the platform. It will also upconvert your existing DVDs great if you are too poor to afford Blu-Ray movies. And again your arguments are AWFUL. Yes, you pay extra for watching HD movies, but you do get something extra for the additional charge.

Sure you do ... and you pay a *lot* more for that 'privilege

Yes having both is not cheap. But playing games on a PC is the more expensive route if you DID have to make a choice of either one.

You never had any touch with reality . ... your math is beyond 'fuzzy'. One game ... there are others ... you just got one very recent example ... average Joe is gonna have to *start over* with SI after 50 hours into the SI 360 game. He is gonna really like that ... otOH, my PC version is already patched .. i don't think there is even a beta patch for the 360 yet but a really convoluted workaround 'average joe' won't bother with

... and when a *new game* comes out for your console that *chugs*chugs*chugs* - in a few years - like the PS2 and xbox do now with their latest games ... you put up with it and pretend it is "fine"

Give me a break. I bought Justice League not too long ago and it ran perfect on my almost 6 yr old XBox. And let me tell you, I thought the graphics were GREAT. If you are going to sit there and try to argue gaming on a PC is just a simple and problem free as a console, again, you need a reality check.

my last mini upgrade cost me 'net $300' - CPU/GPU/RAM - and i can play the very latest games with high detail ... my rig is well over 3 years old ... i upgraded *free* --on the "thirty" games i saved $10 each over buying consoles games ... over 3 years ... and i have another $300 already saved for next year's PC HW upgrade because i actually bought 60 PC games over 3 years ... instead of the more expensive console games
--and i got waay carried away with my upgrade ...

LOL, yeah well your PC is on its last mini-upgrade leg, so get ready to dump a BIG chunk of change on ANOTHER major PC "upgrade" when Alan Wake comes out.

 

[Sniper82]

Originally posted by: JackBurton
LOL, yeah well your PC is on its last mini-upgrade leg, so get ready to dump a BIG chunk of change on ANOTHER major PC "upgrade" when Alan Wake comes out.

Yep a MAJOR upgrade

 

[tuteja1986]

WHO CARES :!

I got a 1 Gaming PC , 360 , PS3 , Wii , PS2 , Dreamcast in my connect my main room connected to the TV and the console i play the most is Dreamcast. I hate sony for killing it and i do hope they suffer huge looses for all the bull they made about PS2 when dreamcast was way better and it had much much better games out in its 1st year than sony could ever dream off.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: apoppin
IF you bothered to read my earlier post, i based it on 100 games over the 5-year life of your console. New console games are generally $10[+] dollars more than their PC counterparts ... and i mostly pay under $20 for relatively new '06 PC games [PREY/Pirates!/B&W2] ... sometimes as little as ten dollars for' 05 [Gun/Fable LC/Darwinia] and much less for pre'04 ... You DO pay more per each console game - on average TEN dollars more ... so *you* stop exaggerating

IF you bothered to read my earlier post, I have a grand total of ~20 games for my XBox that I got back in 2001. So yeah, cut the crap with the 100 games. Hey, if you base it on 1000 games for your console, you'll have $10,000 difference. Man, what a deal. :roll: If you are willing to wait for the price to drop like they do on PC games, you can also get the console games for pretty cheap. You also forgot to mention you can buy pre-owned games for consoles, you can't for PC.

then you have a $600 blu ray player that can't be upgraded ... you can have the premium price for the movies too ... after all you don't mind paying *extra* for console games

Man, your arguments are awful. Why would I want to "upgrade my console?" It will play all the games for it just fine for the life of the platform. It will also upconvert your existing DVDs great if you are too poor to afford Blu-Ray movies. And again your arguments are AWFUL. Yes, you pay extra for watching HD movies, but you do get something extra for the additional charge.

Sure you do ... and you pay a *lot* more for that 'privilege

Yes having both is not cheap. But playing games on a PC is the more expensive route if you DID have to make a choice of either one.

You never had any touch with reality . ... your math is beyond 'fuzzy'. One game ... there are others ... you just got one very recent example ... average Joe is gonna have to *start over* with SI after 50 hours into the SI 360 game. He is gonna really like that ... otOH, my PC version is already patched .. i don't think there is even a beta patch for the 360 yet but a really convoluted workaround 'average joe' won't bother with

... and when a *new game* comes out for your console that *chugs*chugs*chugs* - in a few years - like the PS2 and xbox do now with their latest games ... you put up with it and pretend it is "fine"

Give me a break. I bought Justice League not too long ago and it ran perfect on my almost 6 yr old XBox. And let me tell you, I thought the graphics were GREAT. If you are going to sit there and try to argue gaming on a PC is just a simple and problem free as a console, again, you need a reality check.

my last mini upgrade cost me 'net $300' - CPU/GPU/RAM - and i can play the very latest games with high detail ... my rig is well over 3 years old ... i upgraded *free* --on the "thirty" games i saved $10 each over buying consoles games ... over 3 years ... and i have another $300 already saved for next year's PC HW upgrade because i actually bought 60 PC games over 3 years ... instead of the more expensive console games
--and i got waay carried away with my upgrade ...

LOL, yeah well your PC is on its last mini-upgrade leg, so get ready to dump a BIG chunk of change on ANOTHER major PC "upgrade" when Alan Wake comes out.

you got 20 games for your x-box
:Q

since '01
:shocked:

what a waste ...

i buy at least 20 PC games a year ... and i don't think that is at all excessive


but then i don't watch TV or movies

if i bought 20 console games ... it would cost me $200 *more* a year to happily game

that $200 a year goes toward my PC upgrades


i think your arguments are *beyond awful*
-- for Me

wtH would i pay $600 for something that is graphically superior to the PC for a year [maybe] ... equal to it for another ... then dropping further and further behind until it becomes a Chug-fest with the most demanding games and no upgradability whatsoever

as to saying " try to argue gaming on a PC is just a simple and problem free as a console, again, you need a reality check" ... perhaps you need one

there are very very few totally buggy games released ... NWN2 being an exception as it was a beta rushed out the door by the publisher atari ... i got burned by *one* game in the last few years ... and it is *fixed* now [more-or-less] ... not only is it fixed, the fan-made content is POURING in ... and i *will* get my money's worth - plus

i bought both STALKER and Oblivion on Day One and had ZERO major problems that were not easily worked around ...

Gothic3 turned out to be a peformance-hog ... but my rig can handle it FINE now and it would have been ok then ... if my system RAM wasn't so limited

as to next year .. i am due for a big tax write off for my business ... yeah, it will be a "class" business machine with dual-monitor, quadcore/4GB RAM and a decent DX10 video card ... probably the 'xtx' or 'ultra' whatever it is then

and *coincidently* it will play all my PC games for the next 3 years ... with minor upgrades

those entire 3 years you are gonna be looking at the PC's waay superior graphics and be "contenting" yourself with your PS3, old blueRay and overpriced games

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: apoppin
did you read the interview

or are you one of the *hate mailers* that read only the titles of threads?


why the heck would anyone want an expensive console "PC wannabe" when a cheaper, multi-purpose PC offers better gaming and *much* better graphics?
:Q

Well for $600 I can have a Blu-ray player, 720P/1080P game machine, Linux box, Media player, etc. What computer can you build me for $600 with a legit OS, nice Vista gaming machine? LOL.

That's all well and good, but what about the television to play that system on? Sure, you can get a junker for $100-$200, but if you're in the market for a PS3, I'd assume you'd want some form of HD, whether it be 720p or 1080p. Going cheap, that'd be about $400 for a display, so it makes the cost of a good PC vs. a gaming setup much closer.

You're also omitting the fact that Sony sells the PS3 at a loss, whereas we aren't purchasing our gaming PCs at a loss to the manufacturer. If we were...mmmm

Jesus, you don't add the cost of the TV when comparing a console. I know people LOVE to do this to make the price comparable, but that's simply not an accurate figure. When 99% of people buy an HDTV, they buy it for watching HDTV, HD movies and at a distant third, gaming. That would be like saying you also have to add the cost of the receiver, and speakers. Those components are already there and their main purpose if for something other than gaming. A console is just another way of making use of your existing HT equipment.

Whoa, calm down one second. I know plenty of friends who bought an HDTV solely for the purpose of complementing their new X360 or PS3. Hell, I bought a 30" just for my Wii so I could do EDTV. The added clarity it gave me when watching TV was just a bonus.

I'll do the same for a PC. MOST people use their PC for other things rather than gaming. So you should only compare the parts you'll need to upgrade if you wanted to play games. If you had a PC which consisted of a P4 3.0GHz CPU, 1GB of memory, and integrated video, most people even at AT would have no problems doing their normal everyday computing tasks. HOWEVER, since they DO want to play games, they'll have to buy a new CPU, more memory and DEFINITELY a new video card (or two), oh and yeah, a new motherboard, oh and look at that, now you need a new type of memory...oh wait, you need a new PSU now too. You've now just pretty much rebuilt your whole PC to play games. Yes, you can use it for other things, but you could have used your old machine for those things just fine.

If someone had a P4C and 1GB of memory, unless they were a hardcore gamer, why would they need anything more than a video card upgrade? Maybe if you were planning to maximize your experience in future games, sure. Been to a LAN lately? Most people are gaming on a setup similar to what you suggested, plus a decent video card. No need at all for two video cards.

If you really wanted to overhaul that P4 setup, grab an X2 3600+ for $65, 2GB of DDR 667 for $100, a decent AM2 board for $75, an Enhance 500W for $70, and an 8800GTS 320MB for $275. That's $585, not including the money you get back from selling your old equipment. That's not bad.

Anyone that tries to pretend PC gaming is in the same league price wise as console gaming needs to get back to reality. PC gaming is much more expensive than console gaming. That's just a fact. It is also not as simple as just popping in a game and having it just play. If you buy an XBox 360/PS3/Wii game now or 3 years from now, it is guaranteed to run just about flawlessly when you get home. That is the beauty of console gaming, simplicity. And THAT is why is is doing so well.

I'm not. All I said was that PC gaming is a lot closer than some here would have you believe, pricewise. This is my opinion, I have seen it be true in the real world, and I will stick with it. No harm done, and no need for you to get antsy with my post.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: apoppin
as to saying " try to argue gaming on a PC is just a simple and problem free as a console, again, you need a reality check" ... perhaps you need one

Yeah, of course I'm the one apoppin. :roll: You're the only one that believes your arguments.

It's quite obvious you are just trying to defend your little PC gaming world and view consoles as a serious threat. Although I do LOVE PC gaming, I now wish that consoles would kill PC gaming just so I can come in here and laugh at you. That would be great. We all know consoles definitely aren't going anywhere.