PC can't run Halo 3.
2-10-08
Are you sure? i bet we see 360emulator out there if we look for it:P
This topic is locked from further discussion.
If gaming computers were better more people would have them
done deal, consoles are better
of corse for the money.... PCs are better... duh
someone said consoles are the poor mans PC... kinda true
cheap computers that will rin todays games will not run tomorrows games the same, consoles will always run the games the best they can
My card is from 2009. Still able to max everything 60+FPS. You also need to take into account the money saved by buying PC games. It stacks up after a while. If you upgrade every other year or so the cost of a PC and console tend to even out. The reason why people buy consoles rather than PCs is because to buy a PC you need a bit of know how. You need to know what is a good deal and what parts give good performance. Most people dont want to be bothered with that, so they buy a console.If gaming computers were better more people would have them
done deal, consoles are better
of corse for the money.... PCs are better... duh
someone said consoles are the poor mans PC... kinda true
cheap computers that will rin todays games will not run tomorrows games the same, consoles will always run the games the best they can
mejiseike
You just contradicted yourself... You ever heard of the saying, "You get what you pay for?"If gaming computers were better more people would have them
done deal, consoles are better
of corse for the money.... PCs are better... duh
someone said consoles are the poor mans PC... kinda true
cheap computers that will rin todays games will not run tomorrows games the same, consoles will always run the games the best they can
mejiseike
[QUOTE="mejiseike"]My card is from 2009. Still able to max everything 60+FPS. You also need to take into account the money saved by buying PC games. It stacks up after a while. If you upgrade every other year or so the cost of a PC and console tend to even out. The reason why people buy consoles rather than PCs is because to buy a PC you need a bit of know how. You need to know what is a good deal and what parts give good performance. Most people dont want to be bothered with that, so they buy a console.If gaming computers were better more people would have them
done deal, consoles are better
of corse for the money.... PCs are better... duh
someone said consoles are the poor mans PC... kinda true
cheap computers that will rin todays games will not run tomorrows games the same, consoles will always run the games the best they can
Iantheone
A lot of people don't even know you can play these big games on PC's. It all comes down to consumer ignorance.
Advertising TV and commericials tell people what they should like, and since half of the US(alone - yes I know, there are more countries than the USA, I'm just using it as an example) is into shallow action and sex addiction, it creates a huge mass market. Since most commercials will either utilize action or sex for video games, of course they are going to sell. Especially to all the casuals who think, "wow, that looks cool!" after seeing a CoD commercial with no gameplay whatsoever.
[QUOTE="mejiseike"]My card is from 2009. Still able to max everything 60+FPS. You also need to take into account the money saved by buying PC games. It stacks up after a while. If you upgrade every other year or so the cost of a PC and console tend to even out. The reason why people buy consoles rather than PCs is because to buy a PC you need a bit of know how. You need to know what is a good deal and what parts give good performance. Most people dont want to be bothered with that, so they buy a console. Regardless of $ saved on games, regardless of better graphics (which applies only to some PC games, not all), regardless of control options, higher resolutions, mods, or anything else... ...consoles still have a massive amount of games that are unavailable on PC. It's a myth that people skip on PCs simply because "they don't want to be bothered" with picking out parts, upgrading, etc.If gaming computers were better more people would have them
done deal, consoles are better
of corse for the money.... PCs are better... duh
someone said consoles are the poor mans PC... kinda true
cheap computers that will rin todays games will not run tomorrows games the same, consoles will always run the games the best they can
Iantheone
[QUOTE="Iantheone"][QUOTE="mejiseike"]My card is from 2009. Still able to max everything 60+FPS. You also need to take into account the money saved by buying PC games. It stacks up after a while. If you upgrade every other year or so the cost of a PC and console tend to even out. The reason why people buy consoles rather than PCs is because to buy a PC you need a bit of know how. You need to know what is a good deal and what parts give good performance. Most people dont want to be bothered with that, so they buy a console. Regardless of $ saved on games, regardless of better graphics (which applies only to some PC games, not all), regardless of control options, higher resolutions, mods, or anything else... ...consoles still have a massive amount of games that are unavailable on PC. It's a myth that people skip on PCs simply because "they don't want to be bothered" with picking out parts, upgrading, etc. And PCs have even more games that cannot be played on consoles. Whats your point? And its not a myth. Its probably the biggest advantage that consoles have over PC: Ease of use.If gaming computers were better more people would have them
done deal, consoles are better
of corse for the money.... PCs are better... duh
someone said consoles are the poor mans PC... kinda true
cheap computers that will rin todays games will not run tomorrows games the same, consoles will always run the games the best they can
Mrmccormo
And PCs have even more games that cannot be played on consoles. Whats your point? And its not a myth. Its probably the biggest advantage that consoles have over PC: Ease of use. IantheonePC has more games than consoles within certain genres, but where is your abundance of platformers, 3rd person shooters, sports games, racing games, etc? My point is that PC is not the be-all-and-end-all system. If you game only on PC, you miss a ton. Yeah, ease of use is why people skip out on PCs. Right. Because consumers think to themselves "Gee, I'd love to play Halo Reach on my PC, but I guess console would just be easier. I'll get a 360". Nope, it's because consoles do a much better job of attracting consumers because of their mass-advertised exclusives.
[QUOTE="Iantheone"]And PCs have even more games that cannot be played on consoles. Whats your point? And its not a myth. Its probably the biggest advantage that consoles have over PC: Ease of use. MrmccormoPC has more games than consoles within certain genres, but where is your abundance of platformers, 3rd person shooters, sports games, racing games, etc? My point is that PC is not the be-all-and-end-all system. If you game only on PC, you miss a ton. Yeah, ease of use is why people skip out on PCs. Right. Because consumers think to themselves "Gee, I'd love to play Halo Reach on my PC, but I guess console would just be easier. I'll get a 360". Nope, it's because consoles do a much better job of attracting consumers because of their mass-advertised exclusives.
Exactly, it all comes down to sheep buying things that the media tells them to buy.
Many people didn't even know what Crysis was and still don't for that matter. I told about 5 people at work(these are regular video gamers who have either a PS3 or 360) about Crysis 2 and they had no idea what Crysis even was.
[QUOTE="Iantheone"]And PCs have even more games that cannot be played on consoles. Whats your point? And its not a myth. Its probably the biggest advantage that consoles have over PC: Ease of use. MrmccormoPC has more games than consoles within certain genres, but where is your abundance of platformers, 3rd person shooters, sports games, racing games, etc? My point is that PC is not the be-all-and-end-all system. If you game only on PC, you miss a ton. Yeah, ease of use is why people skip out on PCs. Right. Because consumers think to themselves "Gee, I'd love to play Halo Reach on my PC, but I guess console would just be easier. I'll get a 360". Nope, it's because consoles do a much better job of attracting consumers because of their mass-advertised exclusives. And there are tons of games that you miss out on if you dont play on a PC. I worked in a PC repair shop, you have no idea how many people seem to think that their HDD is their case. Or that their monitor is their computer. The mass majority of people dont actually know a lot about computers. Yes, advertising helps consoles sell, but are you trying to say consoles are better because they get more advertising? That doesnt make any sense. I dont see why anyone would deny that to most people, PCs are used for work and internet and not for gaming.
[QUOTE="2-10-08"]
PC can't run Halo 3.
DragonfireXZ95
Why would PC want to? The game isn't that great. :?
Isn't that great? That's why it has tons of critical praise, a still active online community and a 94 metacritic ;)im pretty sure if i can max out crysis warhead with my 8800 gt i could atleast max out crysis 2 dx9 at 1024x768 atleast.thcxanthrax420
An 8800gt cannot max crysis. Well i guess it can if you wanna play at 15fps. However it will be able to play Crysis 2 on the lower end settings(Which do not look bad at all from seeing the beta)
PC has more games than consoles within certain genres, but where is your abundance of platformers, 3rd person shooters, sports games, racing games, etc? My point is that PC is not the be-all-and-end-all system. If you game only on PC, you miss a ton. Yeah, ease of use is why people skip out on PCs. Right. Because consumers think to themselves "Gee, I'd love to play Halo Reach on my PC, but I guess console would just be easier. I'll get a 360". Nope, it's because consoles do a much better job of attracting consumers because of their mass-advertised exclusives.[QUOTE="Mrmccormo"][QUOTE="Iantheone"]And PCs have even more games that cannot be played on consoles. Whats your point? And its not a myth. Its probably the biggest advantage that consoles have over PC: Ease of use. DragonfireXZ95
Exactly, it all comes down to sheep buying things that the media tells them to buy.
Many people didn't even know what Crysis was and still don't for that matter. I told about 5 people at work(these are regular video gamers who have either a PS3 or 360) about Crysis 2 and they had no idea what Crysis even was.
Doesn't negate the fact that there are a ton of top-rated and top-selling console games unavailable on PC. And PC has just as many sheep....10+ million WoW subscribers say Hi.[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="2-10-08"]
PC can't run Halo 3.
Ravensmash
Why would PC want to? The game isn't that great. :?
Isn't that great? That's why it has tons of critical praise, a still active online community and a 94 metacritic ;)Because it's compared to console games. Try comparing it to PC games.
I'd like to see how Halo: Reach fares if it was released on PC.
I bet you it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is on 360, in fact, it probably wouldn't get the same scores either.
[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="Mrmccormo"] PC has more games than consoles within certain genres, but where is your abundance of platformers, 3rd person shooters, sports games, racing games, etc? My point is that PC is not the be-all-and-end-all system. If you game only on PC, you miss a ton. Yeah, ease of use is why people skip out on PCs. Right. Because consumers think to themselves "Gee, I'd love to play Halo Reach on my PC, but I guess console would just be easier. I'll get a 360". Nope, it's because consoles do a much better job of attracting consumers because of their mass-advertised exclusives.Mrmccormo
Exactly, it all comes down to sheep buying things that the media tells them to buy.
Many people didn't even know what Crysis was and still don't for that matter. I told about 5 people at work(these are regular video gamers who have either a PS3 or 360) about Crysis 2 and they had no idea what Crysis even was.
Doesn't negate the fact that there are a ton of top-rated and top-selling console games unavailable on PC. And PC has just as many sheep....10+ million WoW subscribers say Hi. Of course it doesn't negate the fact, it supports the fact. And WoW has tons of commercials, so you just proved my point.[QUOTE="Jebus213"]
[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]
I really don't care what your expensive PC rigs are capable of. Playing Games Like Uncharted and Gears of War in 1080p on a 42" is good enough for me.
tubbyc
Cosnoles don't even do true HD and Gears and UC2 are far from have great graphics.
Woah you're extremely hard to please.:shock:
Well uh...I play PC.
Anything on console looks terrible to me because of the overall less quality. When I start playing on a console I can barely see anything because of the lack of AA, lower res, and everything just looks plain fuzzy and ugly.
[QUOTE="Ravensmash"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]Isn't that great? That's why it has tons of critical praise, a still active online community and a 94 metacritic ;) Because it's compared to console games. Try comparing it to PC games. :lol: Ok, now I'm not sure if you're being serious. You seem to be in the mindset that there is some massive standards gap, when in reality there isn't.Why would PC want to? The game isn't that great. :?
DragonfireXZ95
[QUOTE="tubbyc"]
[QUOTE="Jebus213"]
Cosnoles don't even do true HD and Gears and UC2 are far from have great graphics.
Jebus213
Woah you're extremely hard to please.:shock:
Well uh...I play PC.
Anything on console looks terrible to me because of the overall less quality. When I start playing on a console I can barely see anything because of the lack of AA, lower res, and everything just looks plain fuzzy and ugly.
That might not be down to the resolution if everything looks fuzzy and you can barely see it. That or you're exaggerating massively to try and inflate your PC's worth.Because it's compared to console games. Try comparing it to PC games. :lol: Ok, now I'm not sure if you're being serious. You seem to be in the mindset that there is some massive standards gap, when in reality there isn't.[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="Ravensmash"] Isn't that great? That's why it has tons of critical praise, a still active online community and a 94 metacritic ;)Ravensmash
Considering the games available, yes there is.
Team Fortress 2 is around 10 times better than the console versions. Same with L4D2, any Valve game for that matter.
We have more exclusive multiplayer first person shooters that actually have good multiplayer. like Red Orchestra 1 and 2, Counter-Strike and CS:S, Natural Selection 1 and 2, Battlefield series(the latest with BF3 with 64 player support, unlike the consoles and including BF2 which still has a ton of players), Shattered Horizon, Crysis Wars, etc.
Sure, we have our mass markets on PC that only plays CoD games, but those are mostly the people who have no idea what a lot of the games I listed are.
On the PC we have more choices for quality multiplayer games, it's a fact.
And I don't want to hear you combining PS3 and 360 games, keep the platforms individual, or else you're just proving how much the PC is ahead if you have to combine 2 platforms.
Isn't that great? That's why it has tons of critical praise, a still active online community and a 94 metacritic ;)[QUOTE="Ravensmash"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]
Why would PC want to? The game isn't that great. :?
DragonfireXZ95
Because it's compared to console games. Try comparing it to PC games.
I'd like to see how Halo: Reach fares if it was released on PC.
I bet you it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is on 360, in fact, it probably wouldn't get the same scores either.
Fun is fun regardless of platform. The existence of the PC doesn't undo the enjoyment I got out of playing Reach.:lol: Ok, now I'm not sure if you're being serious. You seem to be in the mindset that there is some massive standards gap, when in reality there isn't.[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]
[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"] Because it's compared to console games. Try comparing it to PC games.DragonfireXZ95
Considering the games available, yes there is.
Team Fortress 2 is around 10 times better than the console versions. Same with L4D2, any Valve game for that matter.
We have more exclusive multiplayer first person shooters that actually have good multiplayer. like Red Orchestra 1 and 2, Counter-Strike and CS:S, Natural Selection 1 and 2, Battlefield series(the latest with BF3 with 64 player support, unlike the consoles and including BF2 which still has a ton of players), Shattered Horizon, Crysis Wars, etc.
Sure, we have our mass markets on PC that only plays CoD games, but those are mostly the people who have no idea what a lot of the games I listed are.
On the PC we have more choices for quality multiplayer games, it's a fact.
And I don't want to hear you combining PS3 and 360 games, keep the platforms individual, or else you're just proving how much the PC is ahead if you have to combine 2 platforms.
I wasn't going to combine PS3 and 360 games, but considering that your point is against 'console' games (you know, combined platforms), I don't see a reason why. I don't see how the PC having some FPS's = Halo 3's praise and general reception being any less deserved. I've played BF2/CS:S/TF2 on PC (not for massive amounts of time, but still...) and they don't strike me as being massively above Halo 3's quality.[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="Ravensmash"] Isn't that great? That's why it has tons of critical praise, a still active online community and a 94 metacritic ;)lowe0
Because it's compared to console games. Try comparing it to PC games.
I'd like to see how Halo: Reach fares if it was released on PC.
I bet you it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is on 360, in fact, it probably wouldn't get the same scores either.
Fun is fun regardless of platform. The existence of the PC doesn't undo the enjoyment I got out of playing Reach. I'm not talking about you, read my original statement, obviously it was my opinion.[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="Ravensmash"] :lol: Ok, now I'm not sure if you're being serious. You seem to be in the mindset that there is some massive standards gap, when in reality there isn't.
Ravensmash
Considering the games available, yes there is.
Team Fortress 2 is around 10 times better than the console versions. Same with L4D2, any Valve game for that matter.
We have more exclusive multiplayer first person shooters that actually have good multiplayer. like Red Orchestra 1 and 2, Counter-Strike and CS:S, Natural Selection 1 and 2, Battlefield series(the latest with BF3 with 64 player support, unlike the consoles and including BF2 which still has a ton of players), Shattered Horizon, Crysis Wars, etc.
Sure, we have our mass markets on PC that only plays CoD games, but those are mostly the people who have no idea what a lot of the games I listed are.
On the PC we have more choices for quality multiplayer games, it's a fact.
And I don't want to hear you combining PS3 and 360 games, keep the platforms individual, or else you're just proving how much the PC is ahead if you have to combine 2 platforms.
I wasn't going to combine PS3 and 360 games, but considering that your point is against 'console' games (you know, combined platforms), I don't see a reason why. I don't see how the PC having some FPS's = Halo 3's praise and general reception being any less deserved. I've played BF2/CS:S/TF2 on PC (not for massive amounts of time, but still...) and they don't strike me as being massively above Halo 3's quality.They do for me. Are you talking about the gameplay or the quality of the games?
Sure the quality of Halo is there, I won't deny that. However, I find the gameplay boring and outdated.
And why would those exclusive PC FPS games make a dent on Halo 3's success? That's the reason Halo is so popular on consoles, because there isn't that much choice otherwise.
[QUOTE="thcxanthrax420"]im pretty sure if i can max out crysis warhead with my 8800 gt i could atleast max out crysis 2 dx9 at 1024x768 atleast.Crypt_mx
An 8800gt cannot max crysis. Well i guess it can if you wanna play at 15fps. However it will be able to play Crysis 2 on the lower end settings(Which do not look bad at all from seeing the beta)
LOL, sure it cant.For those of you who haven't seen the Crysis 2 road rage video, check it out here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UUrXPZcKh0
Firstly i would like to start by saying that the framerate is low from beginning to end in the video. My main problem can be found about 55 seconds in to the video to about 58 seconds.
Go look now.
Check out how the rocks are rendered in directly in front of him, literally 5 feet away.
I went to do some digging and have found that this problem is NOT in the leaked version of the PC beta when played on the highest settings.
I bring this up because it seems alot of gamers are convinced that their xbox or playstation has power that is anywhere close to a PC. I dont point this out to put people down or hate, i love the consoles and game on them.
Just know that the consoles are barely capable of running crysis 2, having to sacrifice quality in order to work. When an extremely old beta version on the PC looks and performs better than a much newer revison on the consoles, the truth is unaviodable.
Lets talk if Killzone 3 ever shows up on a PC. It'll be a tie with crysis.[QUOTE="Crypt_mx"]Lets talk if Killzone 3 ever shows up on a PC. It'll be a tie with crysis.For those of you who haven't seen the Crysis 2 road rage video, check it out here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UUrXPZcKh0
Firstly i would like to start by saying that the framerate is low from beginning to end in the video. My main problem can be found about 55 seconds in to the video to about 58 seconds.
Go look now.
Check out how the rocks are rendered in directly in front of him, literally 5 feet away.
I went to do some digging and have found that this problem is NOT in the leaked version of the PC beta when played on the highest settings.
I bring this up because it seems alot of gamers are convinced that their xbox or playstation has power that is anywhere close to a PC. I dont point this out to put people down or hate, i love the consoles and game on them.
Just know that the consoles are barely capable of running crysis 2, having to sacrifice quality in order to work. When an extremely old beta version on the PC looks and performs better than a much newer revison on the consoles, the truth is unaviodable.
iwasgood2u
Wrong. The Killzone developers are good at optimizing games for the ps3, attemptina a PC game would be a mess. Also KZ3 isnt even close to Crysis 1 graphically, they would need to do alot of work.
[QUOTE="Jebus213"][QUOTE="tubbyc"]
Woah you're extremely hard to please.:shock:
Ravensmash
Well uh...I play PC.
Anything on console looks terrible to me because of the overall less quality. When I start playing on a console I can barely see anything because of the lack of AA, lower res, and everything just looks plain fuzzy and ugly.
That might not be down to the resolution if everything looks fuzzy and you can barely see it. That or you're exaggerating massively to try and inflate your PC's worth.So anyway the picture quality on consoles looks horrible right? RIGHT!
Fun is fun regardless of platform. The existence of the PC doesn't undo the enjoyment I got out of playing Reach. I'm not talking about you, read my original statement, obviously it was my opinion. Let's recap:[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]
Because it's compared to console games. Try comparing it to PC games.
I'd like to see how Halo: Reach fares if it was released on PC.
I bet you it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is on 360, in fact, it probably wouldn't get the same scores either.
DragonfireXZ95
So, let's set aside whether you were talking about me and focus solely on my argument, that good games are good regardless of platform. If you'd like to provide a counter-argument, I'm listening. If you'd prefer to talk about me, I'm sure there are several forums around the internet dedicated to discussing my general awesomeness; I suggest you seek one out.
I'm not talking about you, read my original statement, obviously it was my opinion. Let's recap:[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]
[QUOTE="lowe0"] Fun is fun regardless of platform. The existence of the PC doesn't undo the enjoyment I got out of playing Reach.lowe0
So, let's set aside whether you were talking about me and focus solely on my argument, that good games are good regardless of platform. If you'd like to provide a counter-argument, I'm listening. If you'd prefer to talk about me, I'm sure there are several forums around the internet dedicated to discussing my general awesomeness; I suggest you seek one out.
I never stated that Halo 3 wasn't a quality game on the consoles, nor that it wasn't a quality game in general. I said that I didn't find the game that great. I even said that the quality of Halo is there, I just didn't enjoy it. However, we have no idea how Halo would fare in the PC world if it were released today, I was simply making a guess on that. So what did you want to argue about again? Also, I think Halo 3 runs on the 360, isn't that a console? :P PS: I doubt we'll see a single thread on your so called awesomeness, as it really lacks existence. :PThat might not be down to the resolution if everything looks fuzzy and you can barely see it. That or you're exaggerating massively to try and inflate your PC's worth.[QUOTE="Ravensmash"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]
Well uh...I play PC.
Anything on console looks terrible to me because of the overall less quality. When I start playing on a console I can barely see anything because of the lack of AA, lower res, and everything just looks plain fuzzy and ugly.
Jebus213
So anyway the picture quality on consoles looks horrible right? RIGHT!
No. 720p is fine and the aliasing for 360/PS3 games is usually very minimal, if there at all. I play PC too and recognise that it can run games more smoothly at a sharper resolution, and it's technically more impressive. But that doesn't stop games like UC2 from looking great. Hell, even some of themuch less technically impressive games can look great in their own way. So for picture quality, it's not as high as what PCs can do, but still fine on an HDTV. However, there's so much more to a game's look than picture quality, so consoles still have great looking games.
[QUOTE="Ravensmash"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]
Considering the games available, yes there is.
Team Fortress 2 is around 10 times better than the console versions. Same with L4D2, any Valve game for that matter.
We have more exclusive multiplayer first person shooters that actually have good multiplayer. like Red Orchestra 1 and 2, Counter-Strike and CS:S, Natural Selection 1 and 2, Battlefield series(the latest with BF3 with 64 player support, unlike the consoles and including BF2 which still has a ton of players), Shattered Horizon, Crysis Wars, etc.
Sure, we have our mass markets on PC that only plays CoD games, but those are mostly the people who have no idea what a lot of the games I listed are.
On the PC we have more choices for quality multiplayer games, it's a fact.
And I don't want to hear you combining PS3 and 360 games, keep the platforms individual, or else you're just proving how much the PC is ahead if you have to combine 2 platforms.
I wasn't going to combine PS3 and 360 games, but considering that your point is against 'console' games (you know, combined platforms), I don't see a reason why. I don't see how the PC having some FPS's = Halo 3's praise and general reception being any less deserved. I've played BF2/CS:S/TF2 on PC (not for massive amounts of time, but still...) and they don't strike me as being massively above Halo 3's quality.They do for me. Are you talking about the gameplay or the quality of the games?
Sure the quality of Halo is there, I won't deny that. However, I find the gameplay boring and outdated.
And why would those exclusive PC FPS games make a dent on Halo 3's success? That's the reason Halo is so popular on consoles, because there isn't that much choice otherwise.
i just want to pointed out that bf2/cs:s/tf2 is far more outdated than halo, if you like those games great, but halo did have a new and refreshing type of multiplayer, and it has built upon that pretty nicely, theres plenty of choice on consoles, just the competition is so bad no one even achowledges it.[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="Ravensmash"] I wasn't going to combine PS3 and 360 games, but considering that your point is against 'console' games (you know, combined platforms), I don't see a reason why. I don't see how the PC having some FPS's = Halo 3's praise and general reception being any less deserved. I've played BF2/CS:S/TF2 on PC (not for massive amounts of time, but still...) and they don't strike me as being massively above Halo 3's quality.savagetwinkie
They do for me. Are you talking about the gameplay or the quality of the games?
Sure the quality of Halo is there, I won't deny that. However, I find the gameplay boring and outdated.
And why would those exclusive PC FPS games make a dent on Halo 3's success? That's the reason Halo is so popular on consoles, because there isn't that much choice otherwise.
i just want to pointed out that bf2/cs:s/tf2 is far more outdated than halo, if you like those games great, but halo did have a new and refreshing type of multiplayer, and it has built upon that pretty nicely, theres plenty of choice on consoles, just the competition is so bad no one even achowledges it.How is BF2 or TF2 more outdated than Halo now?
However, I don't play those games really, so what's your point?
[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]
They do for me. Are you talking about the gameplay or the quality of the games?
Sure the quality of Halo is there, I won't deny that. However, I find the gameplay boring and outdated.
And why would those exclusive PC FPS games make a dent on Halo 3's success? That's the reason Halo is so popular on consoles, because there isn't that much choice otherwise.
i just want to pointed out that bf2/cs:s/tf2 is far more outdated than halo, if you like those games great, but halo did have a new and refreshing type of multiplayer, and it has built upon that pretty nicely, theres plenty of choice on consoles, just the competition is so bad no one even achowledges it.How is BF2 or TF2 more outdated than Halo now?
However, I don't play those games really, so what's your point?
well halo did things that almost every action game had been following like regening health, not saying its a good thing but those PC games definitly have an older game design philosophy, In the end it doesn't really matter which is older, people want to play it so they keep making it with small changes, that includes halo, bf2, cs:s, tf2, and if someone calls something outdated becauase they find it boring and then list games that were around before the game in question, then they kind of look stupidThe PC still can't run Demon Souls, Uncharted 1,2 & 3, Bayoneta, Kill Zone 2 & 3, Castevina LOS, etc on ANY settings so whats your point?
Shielder7
Watch as someone lists out all the random PC exclusives we have that neither consoles can play. :)
[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] i just want to pointed out that bf2/cs:s/tf2 is far more outdated than halo, if you like those games great, but halo did have a new and refreshing type of multiplayer, and it has built upon that pretty nicely, theres plenty of choice on consoles, just the competition is so bad no one even achowledges it.savagetwinkie
How is BF2 or TF2 more outdated than Halo now?
However, I don't play those games really, so what's your point?
well halo did things that almost every action game had been following like regening health, not saying its a good thing but those PC games definitly have an older game design philosophy, In the end it doesn't really matter which is older, people want to play it so they keep making it with small changes, that includes halo, bf2, cs:s, tf2, and if someone calls something outdated becauase they find it boring and then list games that were around before the game in question, then they kind of look stupidI called it outdated and boring in a different post than in the ones I listed. The ones I listed were for variety's sake, stop twisting my words.
Make a valid point when you call me out, otherwise, don't say anything. You're just trying to save your argument by twisting my words.
The fact that crysis 2 works at all on consoles is a feat in it self. My pc vs a console is like a 5 year old vs an adult. Sure my pc will win with ease but imo that is nothing to be happy about.
The PC still can't run Demon Souls, Uncharted 1,2 & 3, Bayoneta, Kill Zone 2 & 3, Castevina LOS, etc on ANY settings so whats your point?
Shielder7
The only reason the pc can't run those games is because they have not been released on pc. If they were they would look much better. Just like the tc pointed out the crysis 2 old beta looks better than the new build on console.
[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]
How is BF2 or TF2 more outdated than Halo now?
However, I don't play those games really, so what's your point?
well halo did things that almost every action game had been following like regening health, not saying its a good thing but those PC games definitly have an older game design philosophy, In the end it doesn't really matter which is older, people want to play it so they keep making it with small changes, that includes halo, bf2, cs:s, tf2, and if someone calls something outdated becauase they find it boring and then list games that were around before the game in question, then they kind of look stupidI called it outdated and boring in a different post than in the ones I listed. The ones I listed were for variety's sake, stop twisting my words.
Make a valid point when you call me out, otherwise, don't say anything. You're just trying to save your argument by twisting my words.
Its not out dated, and when you did say it was it happend to be right after those games were mentioned so those were the frame of reference when you said, I didn't twist your words, you failed to explain what you meant.[QUOTE="Shielder7"]
The PC still can't run Demon Souls, Uncharted 1,2 & 3, Bayoneta, Kill Zone 2 & 3, Castevina LOS, etc on ANY settings so whats your point?
Rude_Bwoii
The only reason the pc can't run those games is because they have not been released on pc. If they were they would look much better. Just like the tc pointed out the crysis 2 old beta looks better than the new build on console.
I wonder if the PS3 can run my old intellivision games, Astrosmash anyone?
Anyway Intellivision > PS3
[QUOTE="2-10-08"]
PC can't run Halo 3.
aroxx_ab
Are you sure? i bet we see 360emulator out there if we look for it:P
The big-E word is a taboo subject for GS's SW.WARNING! More than 5 quotes in a post, trolling and posting in an account suicide thread will result in a moderation, and a possible suspension on your account; flaming equals an automatic 7 day suspension. In addition, discussion about Downgraders, Emulators, Flash Cards, ROMs and Homebrew can also lead to a suspension or the possibility of permanent ban.
If gaming computers were better more people would have them
done deal, consoles are better
of corse for the money.... PCs are better... duh
someone said consoles are the poor mans PC... kinda true
cheap computers that will rin todays games will not run tomorrows games the same, consoles will always run the games the best they can
1. Divide the console market into Wii, Xbox 60 and PS3.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment