Seeing as how everyone is on a level playing field in either version your point is stupid.
Coke is better than Pepsi. Case closed.
And while were on the subject, Borderlands on PC kills Borderlands on console. Try to beat me with your thumbsticks (LOL). You haven't got a prayer.
That is all.......
Yes but the hardware the guy has that you're responding to would give him much better visuals than a console can provide. Max settings are infinitely better than any console can provide.
Seeing as how everyone is on a level playing field in either version your point is stupid.
But the platforms compared are not level. You'd absolutely have no chance. This reminds me of the gold 'ol LCD vs. CRT debates. You can flog a horse only so many times before it's dead and this corpse stinks to high heaven.
This topic has been made 700 times in one form of another, either "why I'm giving up PC games" or "why PC games are better than consoles" or whatever.
I made the same switch as the OP and mostly play console games, although if I had a better computer I'd still game on both. I will upgrade for Diablo 3 when it comes out...
If you had my rig you'd play PC games too.
If you had my rig you'd play PC games too.
Are you serious? I really don't mean to be offensive, but? I think there are vastly different realms of "acceptable" performance on this topic. Mine is quite different from yours.
However, I do like your room. Very very clean. Love the Quake box.
I honestly didn't expect you to respond to that... it was meant as a jab, nothing more. I think whatever picture my sig links to these days is probably old, I've replaced most of my components.
But thank you
And Jack, I wouldn't buy 2 more 30" monitors right now, waiting to see what happens w/ 3d and whatnot. Plus I'm not sure where I'd put them.....
I've been buying new CPU's and GPU's for many years and every time, the newest 300$ GPU or CPU just doesn't cut it. It never has. That latest game always just doesn't run quite like I want it too. Or the card I bought, still isn't the 500$ one. Its like a serious disease I have.
On consoles, while the graphics may not be what a 3000$ PC behemouth will pump out, I don't care as I am more focuses on actually playing the game compared to trying to tweak FPS or graphics quality.
I found that starting with the 6th generation of consoles that the graphics of consoles had caught up to PC enough for me to put off the concept of PC even more. I do miss strategy. However, a great counterexample for me is Supreme Commander 2, it was still very very enjoyable for me on my 360, finding it just as addictive as a mouse and keyboard. Things like Deus Ex 3 and Sims 3, are coming to consoles and I'll most likely just play them there. I even played Thief 3 and Deus Ex 2 on my Xbox1, and found it enjoyable, rather than try beat my 7800GTX around to play them. If a game misbehaves on a console: Its not your fault, and that fares much better for my OCD. Look at Batman: Arkham Asylum, it seems as if I needed a 3000$ behemouth to get at the physics. 360, it just worked and looked great, I think.
The argument towards console grows greater for me, as the consoles are modded and I can have much more open experience with my WII and 360. An example: I am now playing GTA4 on my 360, as I can now rip to USB and not have an F16 take off, stutter and die as a result of the crap of technology that is disc media anymore.
Other things include modding. Sven Coop is something I still find incredibly intriguing on the PC.
I am more than content to play Just Cause, Fallout, Morrowind, etc on my 360. I would rather have a slightly reduced experience (if that) and not have to worry about my 350$ GPU not being good enough.
However, even at that, consoles still are missing one giant thing: Starcraft 2.
I don't know whether I should even post this, but I wanted to get some feedback on these thoughts. Its probably been talked about before and induced flame wars. I'm not totally impartial to either side, I just suppose I'd like a little feedback.
My now modest PC
E2160 OCed 3.2Ghz
2Gig DDR2-800
Geforce 7800GTX
Odd. The absolute oldest/weakest machine I have running out of six is a E8400 with a 280GTX in it and it still obliterates everything on the market. Thats only a $200 graphics card..
I can't quite follow your complaint.
Here's an argument. I payed 550$ for a 7800GTX in 2005. Now, I can't run Team Fortress 2 even with below medium settings without consistently going below 20 FPS.
WTF? 550$, What?
Except it isn't any better today. Looking at graphics card today, you have a slew of "new" cards introduced by AMD and Nvidia, which are actually steps backwards. New features but slower performance. What? Why would I want to pay more money for slower performance? Some people actually consider buying a card from a previous generation at a similar price point, because it offers BETTER performance.
Look at the 5850. ASSUMING you already have the fastest CPU/RAM available on the planet, you can and will dip to 47 fps, for the low low price of 310$ according to tomshardware.com. I'm sorry, I just have a mental block about paying that much money, for anything less than 60fps+ all of the time. Thats a lot of money.
I would like to buy a new graphics card, but then I see benchmarks and I just don't see the point.I can stay where I'm at and have pretty shitty performance, or spend 300$ and have shitty performance except at a some higher settings. Keep waiting until I can spend 100$ on a card which will do my 1920*1200 at full at 50fps+ all the time.
So I just give up and play my 360.
Here's an argument. I payed 550$ for a 7800GTX in 2005. Now, I can't run Team Fortress 2 even with below medium settings without consistently going below 20 FPS.
WTF? 550$, What?
I'm on my 4th GPU since the beginning of 2007. It's hard justify the cost of gaming sometimes, but at the same time, it's like any other vice in life. Some times you just can't.
To put it bluntly, that's your problem. That's what happens when you live on the bleeding edge. I paid $80 for my 8800gt two years ago and still find it to be sufficient, though my standards are not as harsh as yours. As Vash mentioned, you are expecting more performance from the computer.