xbox vs PC

[sfmedic]

If you compare Xbox to todays PC, it is an antiquated piece of machinery. Then why is it still so popular and touted as the best gaming machine, by some that is?

Does anybody know or care when and if the Xbox2 is released?

 

[jbrownos]

Lol depends on how you look at it. My graphics card alone is more powerful than an entire x-box (costs about twice as much too), but an x-box doesn't have the stability/compatibility issues that something as complex as a PC does.

 

[PsharkJF]

Keep also in mind that all consoles are essentially a standardized computer. Therefore, programmers can write tricks to increase performance on that specific hardware set because they do not have to deal with the potential of users running their game on differing hardware.

 

[sfmedic]

I know the stability issues, I built a computer that the kids could use for games, and it occasionally freezes up. I think I narrowed it down to the graphics card which I will be replacing, but that's not what is at issue.

My kids still play the heck out of the console games that they have, Nintendo N64, and even the old NES. They want an Xbox so bad their teeth hurt.

Now as far as games go, most games that you can get for Xbox are they not formatted for PC as well? And in general it seems that games for PC's, the prices drop quicker than for console games. Does this seem to be the case?

 

[Mullzy]

When you have a completely controllable and exclusive hardware platform to code for you can end up with a pretty decent looking game even on really old technology. Games for the XBox don't have to run through windows drivers, directx and various other layers of the OS I know nothing about... Developers code for the hardware specifically and are able to optimize the snot out of game engines; producing something you couldn't for a PC of the same specs.

The XBox is the most capable gaming platform at the moment. It can produce the best quality gaming image and FPS performance. Of course... producing a 640*480 3D image with no AA and possibly no AF (not sure if they have AF for the xbox) isn't exactly mindblowing.

It's going to take a couple more generations of consoles to pry me away from my PC games... perhaps never for that matter.

 

[Gurck]

Because the majority of the population is fully unknowledgeable about computers and thus fears them. X-box is easy, no viruses/spyware/updates to worry about, etc, hardest thing to do (and a great number of people have trouble with even this) is to put a game in the drive.

PC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all consoles.

 

[Coquito]

I only play consoles for the titles unavailable on a pc, or if I have people over. If I ever get a nice 30" lcd, I can eliminate playing sports games & action games on consoles as well.

 

[mehmetmunur]

I have been playing computer games since I was 10 years old. Both on a 386, and a commodore 64. I was lucky enough to see computer games from indiana jones on the commodore to doom3.

However, the fact that you have to keep on upgrading your hardware on a PC in order to keep up with the software is an issue I did not want to tackle while playing games. It is a fact that consoles are released a lot less frequently than PCU, memory, motherboard or GPU upgrades. PS3 is due by 2005-6 and Xbox 2 about a year later.

Do you realize that you are going to have to upgrade to a minimum of 1 GB of ram (and lets face it minimum required RAM and microsoft windows products are nothing but trouble spelled with S-L-O-W), direct x 9.0 compliant PCI-express video card, a 64 bit CPU, btx motherboard, possibly a new PSU to run Longhorn which is due around the same time? Me and my little athlon xp 2500+ desktop with onboard graphics are nowhere near that even with $500 of upgrades. The next Xbox is probably going to be around $300 and still have great graphics and immersive action for another 4 years (say 2011) Who can say that their computer will last them 4 years without upgrades and still play state of the art games.

Xbox was $300 when it came put. It is $149 now. Halo was the main reason I bought into this machine which is more powerful than the laptop I am using right now. Halo 2, which might be the biggest launch of any game in video game history, actually tauts better graphics than Halo does. Who can say that hey are able to run Doom 3 as the same machine (Pentium 100 Mhz CPU say..)as they did Doom 2 (or just Doom) without having to upgrade any hardware. I love my xbox. Halo brought me in, other titles such as Prince of Persia, Fable, Project Gotham Racing and Rainbow Six (which is as addictive as pure cr@ck on Xbox Live) kept me in the franchise.

Nobody can make a judgement about ANY issue, without first considering both sides of the story. I am not saying that Xbox is better than a PC for games. It is not. It is already dated. But it does have a lot of appeal for a lot of people, including myself. Here is the simplest way of looking at the Xbox. The guy who is behind the buggy software of 95% of all the computers behind all the computers on this planet is behind Xbox. It is not only a gaming platform but with MCE 2005 becoming an intimate part of family entartainment and an extension of the PC. Like it or not, Xbox is here to stay, and I am glad.

 

[raildogg]

because people think pc games are all strategy based etc. a lot of people remained with the console, never gave pc a chance.

i was a console boy for many years, but now its all pc

nothing beats playing a shooter with 60 other people

 

[dguy6789]

PS3 is due by 2005-6 and Xbox 2 about a year later.

no, xbox 2(xenon) is comming out before the other 2 consoles, not after.

 

[0roo0roo]

the games. a huge chunk never show on pc. remember how xbox haters used to say it was just a pc and they'd port all the games to pc? lol, how wrong they were fighting games? you don't even have choices of non xbox titles on the pc for that genre.
and really the ps2 is even older hardware....

they do what they are meant to do. they do it well, and do it at a cost no pc can touch. like it or not, our video cards cost way more then an xbox alone, and we go through them very quickly. its just not comparable. like saying you only watch movies,cuz tv sucks

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
PS3 is due by 2005-6 and Xbox 2 about a year later.

no, xbox 2(xenon) is comming out before the other 2 consoles, not after.

X-Box 2 is due 05/06 and PS3 a year after.

 

[Zugzwang152]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: dguy6789
PS3 is due by 2005-6 and Xbox 2 about a year later.

no, xbox 2(xenon) is comming out before the other 2 consoles, not after.

X-Box 2 is due 05/06 and PS3 a year after.

of course, they strategically planned the release of Halo 2 just before the release of XBOX2, to suck in all the on-the-fencers like me :|

well ok, a year is a year i guess.

 

[luciddreams]

Also, most of the games I want to play are released for the console first, then PC. On the one hand, I want to wait and enjoy the game with the power of my PC; on the other hand, often I just can't wait 3 extra months and want to play it now! So, sometimes I choose the nearer good.

(it's especially difficult to wait 3 extra months if I've already been waiting 6 months for the game to be released on console).

 

[dwcal]

Originally posted by: Mullzy
Of course... producing a 640*480 3D image with no AA and possibly no AF (not sure if they have AF for the xbox) isn't exactly mindblowing.

This is probably it. You don't need a whole lot of fill rate for a 640x480 image, and you get a kind of free AA running the output to a TV set because it's so much blurrier than a computer monitor. You save a lot of RAM by cutting out the Windows OS which is how it can get by with 64MB.

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: luciddreams
Also, most of the games I want to play are released for the console first, then PC. On the one hand, I want to wait and enjoy the game with the power of my PC; on the other hand, often I just can't wait 3 extra months and want to play it now! So, sometimes I choose the nearer good.

(it's especially difficult to wait 3 extra months if I've already been waiting 6 months for the game to be released on console).

a lot of titles are pc only ..... aka doom 3, half life 2 ...... etc .......

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: raildogg

Originally posted by: luciddreams
Also, most of the games I want to play are released for the console first, then PC. On the one hand, I want to wait and enjoy the game with the power of my PC; on the other hand, often I just can't wait 3 extra months and want to play it now! So, sometimes I choose the nearer good.

(it's especially difficult to wait 3 extra months if I've already been waiting 6 months for the game to be released on console).

a lot of titles are pc only ..... aka doom 3, half life 2 ...... etc .......

I thnk both of those titles are going to be released on the Xbox atleast I'm sure HL2 will be.

 

[Rankor]

Regardless of old tech. Consoles systems do only one thing: play games.

 

[high]

I play a lot of xbox, and a little pc gaming lately. Although people argue that the gfx are better on pc, which they are...when you're sitting 8-12 feet away from your tv, you REALLY can't tell a difference except for some aliasing problems. The ONLY games I will ever play on my pc are fps's (even then, halo2 comes out for box in a month) and rts (ala warcraft3). For xbox...the xbox live is great and seemlessly integrated in most xbox games, the quality of games is GREAT, some with very few bugs.

Personally, I guess, I am just a sucker for sitting on my comfy couch with some buddies and playin nhl2k5, nba2k5, starwars battlefront, crimson skies...etc

EDIT: Doom3 and hl2 ARE coming out on xbox, and the doom3 xbox live is supposed to be killer, much better online performance and handling than on the pc.

EDIT#2: Also, xbox's don't cause you to mindlessly upgrade to have the latest and greatest hardware, which is a big bonus

 

[Numan]

Originally posted by: raildogg
a lot of titles are pc only ..... aka doom 3, half life 2 ...... etc .......

Both games are definently coming to Xbox

Half Life 2

Doom 3

The last time I saw movies of the Xbox Doom 3 they looked pretty good actually.

 

[SneakyStuff]

I don't enjoy playing my games at ultra low resolutions on a T.V. screen, with those jerky little thumb-sticks? on the controller. I just feel more in control of the game on the computer, and it feels smoother. And to be fair, I own a PS2, and play it from time to time, I liked the crash bandicoot game And can't forget medal of honor for it!

 

[kornphlake]

How many 10 year olds go over to their friends house to play head to head on a computer? It's been a long time since I saw somebody pulling a wagon full of computer parts down the street to their friends house. On the other hand if you want to play a console game it's only a matter of carrying one disc, your friend already has the hardware to play two players. Argue what you may but for children (who are the primary video game demographic) playing multiplayer console games off line is easier, cheaper and more fun than trying to do so with a computer. Honestly how many of you have two mice, two keyboards, two joystick and a large enough monitor to comfortably view a split screen so that two kids can play together. Playing online really isn't the same as playing in the same room as your best friend.

 

[Wingznut]

Like 0roo0roo said...It's about the games.

Some games are better on the PC (i.e. FPS, RTS, etc...) and some are better on consoles (i.e. Fighting, Sports, Platform, etc...)

Both platforms have their advantages and disadvantages. Why does it always have to be one vs the other for many of you guys?


sfmedic... Open your mind, pony up the $150, and get an Xbox. There are A LOT of excellent games for it. And if you have a decent home theater setup, it's even better!

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: kornphlake
How many 10 year olds go over to their friends house to play head to head on a computer? It's been a long time since I saw somebody pulling a wagon full of computer parts down the street to their friends house. On the other hand if you want to play a console game it's only a matter of carrying one disc, your friend already has the hardware to play two players. Argue what you may but for children (who are the primary video game demographic) playing multiplayer console games off line is easier, cheaper and more fun than trying to do so with a computer. Honestly how many of you have two mice, two keyboards, two joystick and a large enough monitor to comfortably view a split screen so that two kids can play together. Playing online really isn't the same as playing in the same room as your best friend.

Why lug your PC to a friend's house to play when you can do it online? And if you like sprawling on the couch with a gamepad in front of your TV, get a ~$25 wireless gamepad and output your computer to your TV. Should be able to do that with no extras; most modern video cards have s-video out and come with the s-video cable and the s-video to RCA adapter you'd need if your TV only has RCA video in.

Then there's the 'you have to upgrade constantly' argument. Odd, then, that I was able to play Far Cry (and in 10x7 with all settings on very high, no less) on a rig I hadn't upgraded in two years (p4b 2.67, ti4600). The game could be played with "console settings" (ie. 640x480, low details) with a 3-4 year old machine easily, maybe something even older. You could find one used for about what a console would cost if not less.

Consoles are for people with ~20/40 vision who don't own a PC. Only other reasons are games that either don't come out for the PC at all or which do but months later... but I can do without a game if the maker is shooting themselves in the foot by not releasing it at all for the PC, and I can wait a few months for far, far better image quality if the maker is delaying the PC release. *shrug*

 

[Gagabiji]

Keyboard+mouse>wimpy analog joysticks.