Do the console gamers have misconceptions of pc?

So you're saying TV size don't matter for console and Internet connection has no impact ?

It's just more leveled out. I learned this back in the days of Counterstrike on my college LAN. Players on my team updated their equipment and improved their game. The jumps to be made with PC gaming are much bigger than the ones that can be done with consoles, hence the evenness of consoles. I believe that the jump from a 22 inch monitor to a 46 inch screen is more of a difference than a 46 to 55 inch, which I've seen more in the console environment.

Processing speed, overclocking, RAM, video memory, hot keys, etc. all are factors in getting better accuracy. Consoles remove that.

But again, remember that the original reason I mentioned a preference for consoles was on what my friends were gaming.

@MonsieurX: PO-TAY-TO!

LOL you need to do some educational reading on that PC then. A whale is an intelligent shark!! See it this August on Shark week: Brain teasers!! It doesn't matter that they are different species, and one has gills and the other a mammal with lungs.

There is so much fail in that post. And considering how low the bar is set for your posts, that is truly saying something.

My friend, every creature is derived from stardust. Technically, we are all the same entity, making me factually and objectivity correct in the thing, I said.

This misconception that pc gaming is somehow more expensive. And that you need to build a $1200 or cheaper PC for it to be less expensive. Maybe... maybe you also need games and that makes PC a pretty good deal from a purely financial standpoint.

My pal, while I agree we are all from the same creative force, and living this physical phenomenon of life for the sole purpose of sensory experience, that doesn't rationalize your BS. I know you like trying to come across how ever you label yourself, but no. That was weak.

But you agreed I was right.

I don't see how a bigger screen will make you a better player.

None of what you mention affect accurancy.

@uninspiredcup:

Oh please. Taking it back to the fact that life sprang from one source doesn't justify calling the largest mammal on the planet an intelligent fish. I never said you were "right". It was stupid, imo. I made fun of it.

But you said it was right.

@Bebi_vegeta: I prefer having a smaller screen. Trying to play Counter strike on a 42" display versus a 24" is difficult for me.

Exactly, it's really about preference.

Show me where I said "youre right" @uninspiredcup none of that has been proven to be fact anymore than Christianity has

Headshots = easier

Sniping = easier

Sometimes depending on the game or monitor setup = field of view wider

Larger TV, better resolution = further POV

Faster/more powerful specs = better environment rendering, further POV

Hot keys (mouse, keyboard, etc.) = faster in-game buying, techniques, mapping

You can literally buy yourself into being good. I hated that aspect when I played CS.

Which again has nothing to do with accurancy.

In no way does a bigger screen make you better...

Large TV don't have better resolution...

How does better enviromment rendering (whatever that means) make anyone a better player.

Your only valid point would be hot keys, which could all be done software wise.

It really seems like you have absolutely no idea of what your talking about. Have you ever been to a lan tournament ? Did you ever see someone bring a 55" screen to be better ?

Yeah I was told you would have to give up your firstborn and your social life to be accepted into the hermit circle but ha (!) I have neither to begin with.

@cainetao11 said:

@MonsieurX: PO-TAY-TO!

Disappointed it's not the gif version

Criticizing isn't hating. Just pointing out that like any other game it has imperfections.

HL 2's physics were a small step up from Far Cry. The friendly npc animations were good but that's not really gameplay and certainly doesn't make it replayable. I would have preferred they spend more time on combat ai than firendly npc ai. The only real gameplay innovation was the gravity gun. There were some hollywood movie style set pieces during Water Hazard where you have explosion left and right. You didn't see that much back in those days although I remember CoD having some great set pieces for the time.

When it comes to actual shooting which is supposed to be the main attraction of a shooter CoD, Far Cry, Halo and Vietcong did it better.

I bough HL 2 on release day btw. It was an awesome game on the first playthrough but i had no desire to replay when finished. Far cry on the other hand I immediately started a new campaign.

Where did i change the subject? I see a lot of people only addressing parts or none of my posts because they have no counterpoint.

I never said all those games were more movie like but Max Payne has a higher percentage of cutscenes than Uncharted.

@MonsieurX said:

@cainetao11 said:

@MonsieurX: PO-TAY-TO!

Disappointed it's not the gif version

I just let people down.............................

i was about to say the same

Also, I think many CS pros play on low settings, and even at resolutions less than 1080p. And they just set keybinds for buying and other things which is done through the CS console.

I don't even remember how any of those behave, since you only spend a small fraction of that game fighting those enemies.

The humanoid ai is terrible.

Completely ignoring the ant-lions, about 2/4 of the game is fighting air-vehicles and 1/4 fighting striders and about 2/4 or Episode 2 dealing with Striders and Hunters at the same time.

Seems like, you just have no idea what you are talking about? That could be a possibility worth pondering.

Off the top of my head I know you only fight striders for one or two levels near the end of HL2 and the last battle of episode1 and 2, aka you're pulling numbers out of your ass.

My friend, as someone who completed Halflife 2 at least once a year, your head is useless.

Fractions are hard huh?

Don't be mad.

Be very odd to be mad about right.

Hermits? Do you freaks actually believe that you're the only ones who have access to Windows or something?

I've done plenty of PC gaming and it was never worth the hassle let alone even marginally close to the transformative experience you nutters try and make it out to be. Notice that the most vehement hermits are from countries that they don't even ship consoles to. Any surprise they're bitter?

Mouse/kb feels very laggy on tv's even when using game mode. 360 controller is almost a requirement at this point. Dark Souls and Brothers with m/kb is awful.

Movie game moniker comes from games like Metal gear solid and Heavy Rain. What's your definition of a movie game?

What countries are those?

I disagree. I've been playing on my 24" 1080p TV and PC monitor dual-setup since 2010. Alternating between the two, I don't see the lag.

Heck. I even use a Logitech wireless mouse/keyboard set.

Well. That depends.

I've got 60 Hz monitors and 60 Hz TV's. In terms of input latency they behave identically. Maybe your TV is 50 Hz, that's common.

It's not the hz it's the input lag. Monitors have much lower input lag than tv's.

I've never experienced this lagg either when hooking up to my TV.

Again with your bs, i play on my big screen tv and it feels just like the monitor but by all means keep spreading bs, it's all you do on these forums.

just check that guy posting history, he seems to just spread bs about pc gaming lol, some butthurt peasant i bet.

You come across as someone who sniffs a lot of glue.

well it would depend on the monitor and the tv. http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/

many tv's within the gaming recommendations. its possible these other gents have monitors/tv's all below 41ms input lag.

So you think a tv which isn't even designed around being used with a mouse is going to perform as well as a monitor which is designed to be used with a mouse?

Bs about pc gaming? Input lag isnt pc specific. Controllers on a monitor feel more responsive as well.

Notice how the average monitor input lag is much better than the average tv http://forums.shoryuken.com/discussion/145141/sub-1-frame-hdtv-monitor-input-lag-database

Yup, something I can agree with you this time. Input lags are far decreased when using a monitor. (Monitors aren't exempt to the PC, they are used widely in MLG esports for consoles as well.)

But, it's not to say you can't game your PC on the TV. You'll just get more input lag, same applies for the console.

On one of your links, it says you can avoid the input lag by using the VGA port. Well, that's what I've been using to hook up my PC with.

I stand by my own actual experience with using HDTV as a monitor.

this is why you ignorant consolites will never go out of mcdonalds, the lag input you so speak of is directly related to the response time of tvs, modern tvs usually have below 5 ms of response time and work at 60hz which is equal to monitors, unless you activate a bunch of post processing bs you won't notice difference at all, also you think a keyboard and mouse would have input lag but a console controller would not? lol.

Ofc you working at mcdonalds probably have a crappy tv with a crappy response time.

@Bebi_vegeta:

Getting headshots vs. not - accuracy. If I have a bigger screen, I can minutely tweak the mouse sensitivity to work well for the larger screen. Easier to get to a bigger head.

On a 26 inch monitor 1080p vs 720p isn't detectable. On a 55 inch monitor, it is. On a small monitor, I may see a tiny moving blur in the background of an environment. On a larger screen with better resolution, I may actually see a moving person and make out their head, to which, I can target.

Actually, I have been in a LAN tournament for Counterstrike (won both times :D). People don't bring their own equipment aside from headphones, but that is a setup that evens out the playing field. During these tournaments, my teammates who had better hardware at home were not as good. Myself, with the lowest specs at home, actually did the best on the mediocre machines used for the tournament. But I wasn't talking about tournaments, I was talking about playing online in general. I have no interest in playing in LAN parties. When I play at home, I want to do well. It's not fun to suck. I don't want to have to constantly invest to stay ahead of the curve.

Again, I've seen the larger monitor thing happen. Two clanmates were boasting better KTD ratios upon buying larger monitors, one clanmate was better when upgrading their machine. Mechanically and physically, it makes sense.

I'm not sure why you're attempting to argue down my points. My mind is made up already based on my witnessed experiences and the fact that none of my friends play on PC anymore (games I'd play with them). It's easier to buy a console and not worry about specs, upgrades, hardware, convincing friends to go back to PCs, etc. Gaming on PC serves no benefit to me. People consistently say the same benefits of PC gaming to me: better graphics, better community, more variety of games. I don't care about each of those.

In simplest terms: I think pc gamers have a misconception of what they hear come out of a lot of console gamers mouths.