Are PC games really worth it?

[Power666]

Originally Posted by Xenos88

(Nvidia 8600) any lower than that and the Graphics card on a console is just as good. The 360 in the USA now is only 350$ and thats for the bundled version that comes with everything you need to get started online, the other bundles are lower.

I'd actually put the Xbox 360's GPU ahead of the Geforce 8600 but not by much. The eDRAM on the Xbox 360 allows for anti-aliasing effectively for free while this incurs a performance hit on the Geforce 8600.

Originally Posted by Xenos88

Even if you do have a low-end PC gaming system I doubt the processor is even better than the 360's custom processor. It has 3 symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each. Is your processor better than that?

The triple core CPU in the Xbox 360 sounds really nice on paper. Three processing cores, the ability to run 6 threads concurrently all at 3.2 Ghz. The problem is that the Xbox 360's CPU core's are very striped down. Any task that exploits the weaknesses of the Xbox 360's CPU (AI is a good one here) you'll find modern PC processors better suited for the job. I believe that MS was using a dual 2.5 Ghz PowerPC 970FX system in early development boxes to simulate equivlant CPU performance.

And yes, my system has a better processor set up than the Xbox 360's. Mine has dual dual core PowerPC 970MP's.

I believe there should be specific options (not many requirements) available that will make console games more similar to PC games. As you know console games are obviously better with in areas such as more games (exclusive titles and PS3,360 titles) Japanese RPG's,Racing games and Fighting games. You never see any good racers or fighting games on the PC those belong on a console.

Though Strategy games and FPS games are a PC's strength especially with some PC games specifically. When I saw the orange box on a console I was immediately turned away, I will never buy it on my 360 and will eventually buy it on my PC. The Only FPS games I buy on consoles is as I said games with a weaker multi player component and a good single player.

For strategy games, I never liked the idea of it on consoles but perhaps I havn't gotten used to using a controller for it yet. It is ironic though the first RTS game I ever played was the PSX version of of Red alert 2:Retaliation when I was like 13 or 14 years old. Ever since I have played games like RA2,Tiberian Sun,Galactic Battlegrounds,Starcraft and most recently Rome:Total War I have played PC RTS ever since. I just can't get past the idea of using a controller for a strategy game, still I should at least give it a chance and maybe download the demo of C&C3 just to try it out. Still I will buy that game on PC soon enough.

I believe consoles should be more like playing on the PC though. It is a fact that the console market far surpasses PC gaming in sales numbers etc..even with the games. Console FPS games should have mouse support,so should strategy games. There should also be the added option of using Mod content from the internet for that Specific game. (Strategy and FPS games). If they ever came out with this or had this feature on Specific FPS games that have been hits on the PC then both consoles and PC games should be combined for a better gaming community. Allowing for full cross-compatibility for consoles and PC games with the ability for console players to join those massive 64 player servers on PC games. Also for PC gamers being able to join smaller console hosted games. They should do this for strategy games to. As far as this goes Microsoft is ahead of PS3 in combining console and PC gaming. They have already done it with Shadowrun but as you know that wasn't a great game anyway. Microsoft's games for windows thing allows for PC gamers to have a service similar to Xbox live on Windows Vista. You would be able to have a friend list that looks just like Xbox 360's on the PC and you will be able to add people from xbox live.

Im surprised Epic is paying extra attention to the PS3 giving Unreal 3 extra attention allowing mouse support and user Mod support. Why couldn't they do this on 360? The console most people have? I heard it was because Live is a closed system and user mods arn't aloud. The 360 a console known for it's FPS/Shooter games also has no mouse support. The PS3 must really be trying to compete since they have all this with there Unreal 3.

Consoles Should also have an added option of purchasing a new graphics card to put in your console so you will be able to upgrade it every now and then.

I hope my dreams for console gaming come with the Xbox 720 and some new PS3 console.

[neowolf]

Originally Posted by Xenos88

Consoles Should also have an added option of purchasing a new graphics card to put in your console so you will be able to upgrade it every now and then.

I hope my dreams for console gaming come with the Xbox 720 and some new PS3 console.

The biggest advantage console gaming has over PC gaming is that it's kept simple and upgrades are made in single fell swoops on a regular schedule. Historically releasing tons and tons of major add-ons has never gone over well. (See Sega.)

[Power666]

Originally Posted by Xenos88

Im surprised Epic is paying extra attention to the PS3 giving Unreal 3 extra attention allowing mouse support and user Mod support. Why couldn't they do this on 360? The console most people have? I heard it was because Live is a closed system and user mods arn't aloud. The 360 a console known for it's FPS/Shooter games also has no mouse support. The PS3 must really be trying to compete since they have all this with there Unreal 3.

How much a console is allow to interface with PC systems is entirely up to the console manufacturer. In the case of Sony, it is something they want to encourage, partially because Sony wants the PS3 to be seen as an independent computer platform in its own right. MS on the other hand is strictly opposed to the idea. I haven't heard either way about Nintendo's opinion on cross platform compatibility.

For that matter, it isn't just console-to-PC connectivity, but also Xbox 360-to-PS3 (and other console-to-console) compatibility that console manufacturers are worried about. Developers can do this but again are forbidden to do so.

Originally Posted by Xenos88

Consoles Should also have an added option of purchasing a new graphics card to put in your console so you will be able to upgrade it every now and then.

I hope my dreams for console gaming come with the Xbox 720 and some new PS3 console.

Not gonna happen. Consoles are a close platform and for good reason. They are opening themselves up a bit with USB connectivity etc. but outside of storage (ie. hard drives) they're going to offer the same hard spec per generation. Considering how proprietary console designs tend to be, upgradable graphics, processor and RAM aren't going to happen in future systems. The one time they did offer upgradable graphics on a console, it flopped (the Sega 32x).

The reverse is also true. There were attempts in the PC space to create minimum standard profiles for systems. If you're PC met the minimum requriements of that standard, you'd be guranteed to play the title with acceptable performance. The standard juts fell to pieces over the course of time. Manufacturers wanted the spec to favor their hardware as a means of crushing the competition. It caught on with a few developers but eventually disappeared to the traditional minimum requirements on the box.

[downphoenix]

Originally Posted by Xenos88

Then I guess PC's are worth it for you anyway since you seem to like MMO's and online RPG games. I personally think WoW is a waste of time, ive always enjoyed games based on skill. Not some form of non-existent success in a virtual reality. The only MMO's I will ever play is MMOFPS games which will primarily be based on skill. Thats why im interested in games like Huxley but Im not so sure it will be a successful MMO.

Consoles can also be good for RPG's if your like me and you enjoy getting achievement points and are willing to forget the mod content that may be available on PC.

Im not that big on MMOs like WoW, but more the concept of them. I basically want an MMO that allows for WoW's depth, but has more fast paced, pick up and play action like PSO.

NWN on the other hand... I can dig. Single AND multi player goodness, used created content, etc. etc. good times.

[Darth Alec]

PC = Strategy games and retro

[man on the moon]

Originally Posted by Darth Alec

PC = Strategy games and retro

I'd second that, RTS, Simulations and First Person games. Why not narrow it down to shooters? Because I'd rather play Morrowind or Oblivion on First Person mode than to play it with the same view on consoles, I avoid talking about third person in these games because it sucks anyway

I'm not an FPS player, but if I was one, I'd stick to the PC.

[Darth Alec]

Mediavel 2 was/is pretty good. But It's awsome with mods.

Another thing for PC's. Mods.

[STARSBarry]

RTS games with mods... like dawn of war



basically for the cost you don't get as much bang as a console.. but your bang can go alot further up the chart if your willing to spend, a console for example wont be able to ever play empires... because its a damn HL2 mod unless valve release it as a DLC for the shops :P

There are tons of games that only come out on the PC. The fact that many have mods makes it even better. I only list a few examples.

RTS's - Company of Heroes, Warcraft, Starcraft
RPG's - Neverwinter Nights, Witcher
MMORPG's
Strategy/Tactical games - Civilization series, war simulations
Adventure - Syberia, Longest Journey, Sam & Max
Simulation - The Sims, city builders, Spore (hopefully soon)

That's is a TON of games that you are missing out on if you overlook PC gaming.