Why PC is better then a console, CHOICE!!

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#202 Posted by lowe0 (13692 posts) -
ShadowMoses and lowe have already come to this thread. The cycle is complete. The trolls have won again. princeofshapeir
What part of my post was trolling? Be specific.
#203 Posted by Sailor_Enlil (1552 posts) -

[QUOTE="Sailor_Enlil"]

Hence I avoided the XBox360 and went for the PS3, where I'm enjoying the latest games without problems, like Persona 4 Arena (which has no release on the PC).

lundy86_4

The PS3 is hardly infallible... Still, my 60gb is going strong. Yep, systems have games that don't release on other systems.

Apparenly you only hear the vocal minority. Like I said my 4 year old PS3 still chugs along just fine. No problems whatsoever, never took it to the shop, nada. The only changes done to it was an upgraded Hard Disk (originally 80GB, now 320GB). And waiting for the next Project Diva release (Project Diva F for the PS3).

#204 Posted by madsnakehhh (14776 posts) -

Why this threads always get like 200+ pages? :S

#205 Posted by Rocker6 (13358 posts) -

If anyone wants to compare a console (PS360) with a PC here's a tip for fairness. Compare consoles with 2005 laptops, because a console doesn't have a full on (VHS size) graphic card, they just have a chip much like laptops. So get that high end 2005 laptop GPU couple with 512MB of RAM and lets see how well ME3, AC3, GTAIV and so on run on it. Then Crysis, Metro, GTAIV on ICE and so on. Because the comparison you lot love to do is like smartphone vs C64 or bike vs van, stupid and pointless but what ever boosts your ego I guess.Kane04

So, you give up on proper arguments, and vote to bend the rules in favor of consoles?

Fine by me, to counter such a move, I vote to bend the rules to further favor the PC. For example, console advantages such as affordability, "pick up and play" simplicity and games not being locked to any accounts don't count...

Rapid tech advancements have always been an important trait of the PC platform, that can't be ignored. This is System Wars, and PC is a system, so in a discussion, all of its strengths and weaknesses can be listed and used as arguments. Same applies to consoles. If you have a problem with that, take it up with staff, or find another forum...

#206 Posted by lundy86_4 (43891 posts) -

Apparenly you only hear the vocal minority. Like I said my 4 year old PS3 still chugs along just fine. No problems whatsoever, never took it to the shop, nada. The only changes done to it was an upgraded Hard Disk (originally 80GB, now 320GB). And waiting for the next Project Diva release (Project Diva F for the PS3).

Sailor_Enlil

Huh? I only hear the vocal minority, solely because I don't deem the PS3 to be infallible? Beautiful logic.

It's called an anecdote, friend. My PS3 has worked since I bought it a few months after release. However, i'm not ignorant enough to believe it's invincible.

#207 Posted by lostrib (40135 posts) -

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="Sailor_Enlil"]

Hence I avoided the XBox360 and went for the PS3, where I'm enjoying the latest games without problems, like Persona 4 Arena (which has no release on the PC).

Sailor_Enlil

The PS3 is hardly infallible... Still, my 60gb is going strong. Yep, systems have games that don't release on other systems.

Apparenly you only hear the vocal minority. Like I said my 4 year old PS3 still chugs along just fine. No problems whatsoever, never took it to the shop, nada. The only changes done to it was an upgraded Hard Disk (originally 80GB, now 320GB). And waiting for the next Project Diva release (Project Diva F for the PS3).

And you would be the vocal minority in terms of PC hardware breaking. Almost all hardware fails at one time or another. The PS3 is no different

#208 Posted by Kane04 (2069 posts) -

Closer ? As in lets kill the advantage the PC has ?

If I have a gaming laptop, then obviously I can play on batterie. Also, Laptop is portable... not your console. If anything, laptop are more like handheld.

Bebi_vegeta
Closer as in... Desktop GPU: [spoiler] geforcegtx6803qtr-1332395105.jpg [/spoiler] Laptop GPU: [spoiler] geforce_gtx_280m_preview.jpg [/spoiler] PlayStation 3 GPU: [spoiler] GPU-CXD2971DGB-RSX-for-PlayStation3-PS3- [/spoiler] Xbox 360 GPU: [spoiler] 412.jpg [/spoiler] So I was talking about the hardware architecture. And what advantages did I kill? Yearish updates? If you're gonna compare something from today with something 7 years old, that was nothing like the other thing to begin with, of course the outcome is predictable, and that takes me to my original post, fairness. No 2005 laptop can run current console games, not even a 2005 desktop GPU and 512MB can run current console games. And even when the 8th gen comes out, they'll still have GPUs like laptops.

So, you give up on proper arguments, and vote to bend the rules in favor of consoles?

Fine by me, to counter such a move, I vote to bend the rules to further favor the PC.(...)

Rocker6
I wasn't bending any rules, but if we can, I call my 1995 Desktop vs a Smartphone.
#209 Posted by lowe0 (13692 posts) -
[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Closer ? As in lets kill the advantage the PC has ?

If I have a gaming laptop, then obviously I can play on batterie. Also, Laptop is portable... not your console. If anything, laptop are more like handheld.

Kane04
Closer as in... Desktop GPU: [spoiler] geforcegtx6803qtr-1332395105.jpg [/spoiler] Laptop GPU: [spoiler] geforce_gtx_280m_preview.jpg [/spoiler] PlayStation 3 GPU: [spoiler] GPU-CXD2971DGB-RSX-for-PlayStation3-PS3- [/spoiler] Xbox 360 GPU: [spoiler] 412.jpg [/spoiler] So I was talking about the hardware architecture. And what advantages did I kill? Yearish updates? If you're gonna compare something from today with something 7 years old, that was nothing like the other thing to begin with, of course the outcome is predictable, and that takes me to my original post, fairness. No 2005 laptop can run current console games, not even a 2005 desktop GPU and 512MB can run current console games. And even when the 8th gen comes out, they'll still have GPUs like laptops.

So, you give up on proper arguments, and vote to bend the rules in favor of consoles?

Fine by me, to counter such a move, I vote to bend the rules to further favor the PC.(...)

Rocker6
I wasn't bending any rules, but if we can, I call my 1995 Desktop vs a Smartphone.

Ummm... what do you think the thing under that large chunk of plastic and metal on the desktop GPU looks like? A lot like the other 3 pictures, that's for sure.
#210 Posted by savagetwinkie (7981 posts) -

[QUOTE="Kane04"]If anyone wants to compare a console (PS360) with a PC here's a tip for fairness. Compare consoles with 2005 laptops, because a console doesn't have a full on (VHS size) graphic card, they just have a chip much like laptops. So get that high end 2005 laptop GPU couple with 512MB of RAM and lets see how well ME3, AC3, GTAIV and so on run on it. Then Crysis, Metro, GTAIV on ICE and so on. Because the comparison you lot love to do is like smartphone vs C64 or bike vs van, stupid and pointless but what ever boosts your ego I guess.Rocker6

So, you give up on proper arguments, and vote to bend the rules in favor of consoles?

Fine by me, to counter such a move, I vote to bend the rules to further favor the PC. For example, console advantages such as affordability, "pick up and play" simplicity and games not being locked to any accounts don't count...

Rapid tech advancements have always been an important trait of the PC platform, that can't be ignored. This is System Wars, and PC is a system, so in a discussion, all of its strengths and weaknesses can be listed and used as arguments. Same applies to consoles. If you have a problem with that, take it up with staff, or find another forum...

if you want to get technical PC isn't a system its a platform, all he's doing is comparing a type of system (laptop) to consoles of the same time period. It's kind of stupid to force PC's down our throats in system wars, considering the definition of PC here is basically... not a console. Which can include almost every bit of technology ever made in computers.
#211 Posted by mariokart64fan (19607 posts) -

English please , because I have options , its nintendo sony or microsoft those are my choices none of this complicated do i have a good power pack do i need to upgrade my motherboard every yr. and not having to install games is another plus for me ,

And my system of choice (all of them) means i don't need to resort to flamebait threads such as this

#212 Posted by savagetwinkie (7981 posts) -
[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Closer ? As in lets kill the advantage the PC has ?

If I have a gaming laptop, then obviously I can play on batterie. Also, Laptop is portable... not your console. If anything, laptop are more like handheld.

Kane04
Closer as in... Desktop GPU: [spoiler] geforcegtx6803qtr-1332395105.jpg [/spoiler] Laptop GPU: [spoiler] geforce_gtx_280m_preview.jpg [/spoiler] PlayStation 3 GPU: [spoiler] GPU-CXD2971DGB-RSX-for-PlayStation3-PS3- [/spoiler] Xbox 360 GPU: [spoiler] 412.jpg [/spoiler] So I was talking about the hardware architecture. And what advantages did I kill? Yearish updates? If you're gonna compare something from today with something 7 years old, that was nothing like the other thing to begin with, of course the outcome is predictable, and that takes me to my original post, fairness. No 2005 laptop can run current console games, not even a 2005 desktop GPU and 512MB can run current console games. And even when the 8th gen comes out, they'll still have GPUs like laptops.

So, you give up on proper arguments, and vote to bend the rules in favor of consoles?

Fine by me, to counter such a move, I vote to bend the rules to further favor the PC.(...)

Rocker6
I wasn't bending any rules, but if we can, I call my 1995 Desktop vs a Smartphone.

A gpu isn't a graphics card, if you buy a PCI-e it's not just a GPU but a graphics card, PC's, gpu is just the chip itself, with that being said, the GPU is at a disadvantage because the PCI-e connection isn't as clean, if you took the same GPU, compared one on a graphics card to one solderd directly on to a board, the board version can be pushed a little harder. With that being said, Laptops don't usually get as high as desktops because of the airflow issues, that even goes for the CPU, the small chassis doesn't have the airflow it needs. PS3/Xbox i don't think actually had lower clocks, they were just midrange gpu's.
#213 Posted by clyde46 (47009 posts) -

English please , because I have options , its nintendo sony or microsoft those are my choices none of this complicated do i have a good power pack do i need to upgrade my motherboard every yr. and not having to install games is another plus for me ,

And my system of choice (all of them) means i don't need to resort to flamebait threads such as this

mariokart64fan
Nobody cares about you.
#214 Posted by Primordialous (1276 posts) -

[QUOTE="mrfrosty151986"]

We have the option of CHOICE.....

We as hermits spend on hardware what we want to, we can pick from thousands of hardware configuations and can buy the hardware that suits any budget.

If you want to spend £200 on a PC then go and spend £200 on a PC, if you have a £1000 to drop on one then go for it..

But if you consolites want a next generation console you guys HAVE to pay whatever Sony and Microsoft charge...

You want a PS4 next year and Sony release it at £400-500? Guess what, if you want it, if you have your heart set on it hen you HAVE to pay it....

Not a problem for us Hermits :D

That is all....

clyde46

Not sure what this thread is trying to achieve apart from being really bad flame bait.

#215 Posted by JameMcCabe (361 posts) -

You are wrong and that's okay, PCs eat sh!t anyway!

#216 Posted by Primordialous (1276 posts) -

You are wrong and that's okay, PCs eat sh!t anyway!

JameMcCabe

Did you really just say that?

Seriously?

#217 Posted by JameMcCabe (361 posts) -

[QUOTE="JameMcCabe"]

You are wrong and that's okay, PCs eat sh!t anyway!

Primordialous

Did you really just say that?

Seriously?

Yes I did. Do we have a problem?

#218 Posted by Primordialous (1276 posts) -

[QUOTE="Primordialous"]

[QUOTE="JameMcCabe"]

You are wrong and that's okay, PCs eat sh!t anyway!

JameMcCabe

Did you really just say that?

Seriously?

Yes I did. Do we have a problem?

I have a problem with that ignorant statement, yes.

#219 Posted by JameMcCabe (361 posts) -

[QUOTE="JameMcCabe"]

[QUOTE="Primordialous"]

Did you really just say that?

Seriously?

Primordialous

Yes I did. Do we have a problem?

I have a problem with that ignorant statement, yes.

Well then talk to the hand, because I don't feel like wasting my time with you. Keep going on and on about how all music after 1990 sucks and call everybody that doesn't agree with you a troll.

#220 Posted by clyde46 (47009 posts) -

[QUOTE="Primordialous"]

[QUOTE="JameMcCabe"]

Yes I did. Do we have a problem?

JameMcCabe

I have a problem with that ignorant statement, yes.

Well then talk to the hand, because I don't feel like wasting my time with you. Keep going on and on about how all music after 1990 sucks and call everybody that doesn't agree with you a troll.

That Shell Gas ad sucks.
#221 Posted by mitu123 (154494 posts) -

I like consoles over PC because it's easier to pick up and play, it's more convienant. I'm not some super PC guy so I don't want the hassle of setting up my rig and tweaking settings to run games right, I just want to grab my game and play it.

And consoles are more cheaper, PC games are only really cheap during Steam sales, normally they are the same as retail prices, and I don't want to spend money upgrading ever year or two.

Some people like PC gaming, that's good for them. They like spending money on it and learning more about the platform, but I don't like it very much. Aside from RTS games, Morrowind, and Diablo 3 I don't play on PC much. I'm not a fan of mouse and keyboard and it's a pain to set it up on my HDTV, my PS3 is just far more easy.

And this may make some people mad, but it's the truth, I don't really see a big difference between PC and console versions, look at the recent comparison video GS did of Far Cry 3, the PC version didn't look any different from the console versions.

ShadowMoses900
I can't believe you came back and decide to troll yet again...
#222 Posted by mitu123 (154494 posts) -

English please

mariokart64fan

You're one to talk about English...

#223 Posted by p4s2p0 (4167 posts) -
What you see as an advantage I see as a disadvantage. When game performance can vary by setup(hardware) and environment(software). Like some games worked better for me with an ati video card while other nvidia. Or an update would come out for messing with one or more of my games. Too many annoyance far as I'm concerned, I like console convenience and optimization.
#224 Posted by Kane04 (2069 posts) -
[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] A gpu isn't a graphics card, if you buy a PCI-e it's not just a GPU but a graphics card, PC's, gpu is just the chip itself, with that being said, the GPU is at a disadvantage because the PCI-e connection isn't as clean, if you took the same GPU, compared one on a graphics card to one solderd directly on to a board, the board version can be pushed a little harder. With that being said, Laptops don't usually get as high as desktops because of the airflow issues, that even goes for the CPU, the small chassis doesn't have the airflow it needs. PS3/Xbox i don't think actually had lower clocks, they were just midrange gpu's.

You're just adding to my point. Small chassis, like you said, is another thing consoles share with laptops making them more closely related compared with the desktop. And it's not just air flow/heat that limits mobile GPUs (and overall the entire hardware) vs the same one on a desktop, you can open up a laptop underneath and get it at the same temperature (with fans and other trickery) as the desktop would be and still you won't get the same performance. Not to mention the laptop will only do 720 while the "same" GPU on a desktop will do at least 1080, and now a days "fairly easy" 1600.
#225 Posted by sukraj (23478 posts) -

I love my console i only use my pc for the internet.

#226 Posted by Bebi_vegeta (13558 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

Closer ? As in lets kill the advantage the PC has ?

If I have a gaming laptop, then obviously I can play on batterie. Also, Laptop is portable... not your console. If anything, laptop are more like handheld.

Kane04

Closer as in... Desktop GPU: [spoiler] geforcegtx6803qtr-1332395105.jpg [/spoiler] Laptop GPU: [spoiler] geforce_gtx_280m_preview.jpg [/spoiler] PlayStation 3 GPU: [spoiler] GPU-CXD2971DGB-RSX-for-PlayStation3-PS3- [/spoiler] Xbox 360 GPU: [spoiler] 412.jpg [/spoiler] So I was talking about the hardware architecture. And what advantages did I kill? Yearish updates? If you're gonna compare something from today with something 7 years old, that was nothing like the other thing to begin with, of course the outcome is predictable, and that takes me to my original post, fairness. No 2005 laptop can run current console games, not even a 2005 desktop GPU and 512MB can run current console games. And even when the 8th gen comes out, they'll still have GPUs like laptops.

So, you give up on proper arguments, and vote to bend the rules in favor of consoles?

Fine by me, to counter such a move, I vote to bend the rules to further favor the PC.(...)

Rocker6

I wasn't bending any rules, but if we can, I call my 1995 Desktop vs a Smartphone.

What?

There's a GPU in every desktop card just like the picture you showed...

Look, the advantage of PC is the user freedom to do what he wants. And if I can upgrade my PC then it's obviously great for me. Yearly or not, depends on the user needs.

You wanna talk about fairness ? Is the PC gaming as optimized as console ? Can your console do everything the PC can ?

#227 Posted by Bebi_vegeta (13558 posts) -

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] A gpu isn't a graphics card, if you buy a PCI-e it's not just a GPU but a graphics card, PC's, gpu is just the chip itself, with that being said, the GPU is at a disadvantage because the PCI-e connection isn't as clean, if you took the same GPU, compared one on a graphics card to one solderd directly on to a board, the board version can be pushed a little harder. With that being said, Laptops don't usually get as high as desktops because of the airflow issues, that even goes for the CPU, the small chassis doesn't have the airflow it needs. PS3/Xbox i don't think actually had lower clocks, they were just midrange gpu's. Kane04
You're just adding to my point. Small chassis, like you said, is another thing consoles share with laptops making them more closely related compared with the desktop. And it's not just air flow/heat that limits mobile GPUs (and overall the entire hardware) vs the same one on a desktop, you can open up a laptop underneath and get it at the same temperature (with fans and other trickery) as the desktop would be and still you won't get the same performance. Not to mention the laptop will only do 720 while the "same" GPU on a desktop will do at least 1080, and now a days "fairly easy" 1600.

OMG what are you talking about!!! GPU on the laptop can do whatever resolution you trow at it, you can plug it to a external monitor/HDTV.

#228 Posted by RyviusARC (4724 posts) -

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152372

http://www.msimobile.com/level3_productpage.aspx?cid=6&id=381

This laptop is 1199USD and comes with a 7970m which is around the equivalent to a 7850 desktop GPU.

It has a 1080P screen as well.

1199USD might seem like too much but when you consider the hardware then it is not.

It's more portable than a console and already has a screen added to the price.

#229 Posted by Rocker6 (13358 posts) -

[QUOTE="Rocker6"]

[QUOTE="Kane04"]If anyone wants to compare a console (PS360) with a PC here's a tip for fairness. Compare consoles with 2005 laptops, because a console doesn't have a full on (VHS size) graphic card, they just have a chip much like laptops. So get that high end 2005 laptop GPU couple with 512MB of RAM and lets see how well ME3, AC3, GTAIV and so on run on it. Then Crysis, Metro, GTAIV on ICE and so on. Because the comparison you lot love to do is like smartphone vs C64 or bike vs van, stupid and pointless but what ever boosts your ego I guess.savagetwinkie

So, you give up on proper arguments, and vote to bend the rules in favor of consoles?

Fine by me, to counter such a move, I vote to bend the rules to further favor the PC. For example, console advantages such as affordability, "pick up and play" simplicity and games not being locked to any accounts don't count...

Rapid tech advancements have always been an important trait of the PC platform, that can't be ignored. This is System Wars, and PC is a system, so in a discussion, all of its strengths and weaknesses can be listed and used as arguments. Same applies to consoles. If you have a problem with that, take it up with staff, or find another forum...

if you want to get technical PC isn't a system its a platform, all he's doing is comparing a type of system (laptop) to consoles of the same time period. It's kind of stupid to force PC's down our throats in system wars, considering the definition of PC here is basically... not a console. Which can include almost every bit of technology ever made in computers.

SW is all about forcing your platform of preference down other people throats (I do agree this thread is pointless, though!), also, gaming dedicated PC is voted as a system by SW rules, so omitting some of its strengths and weaknesses is bending the rules, and has no place in a proper discussion. His comparison doesn't make much of a sense, as it's omitting a major PC advantage, its open nature...

Of course PC will lose if you're forced to compare a 2005 laptop with a dedicated gaming device, but is there a point in going so low?

Want to attack the PC, it's very possible to do it properly, without resorting to exclusions. Like any other platform, it has its share of flaws which can be used to bring a good criticism in the right hands...

#230 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1817 posts) -

Meh, I mainly use my PC to play free to play games. The last PC game I bought was Starcraft 2. Its just my personal taste that I prefer consoles, but its just my opinion.

sonic1564
Meh, I prefer the comfort and convenience of my PC, and the ability to play any game on it, and use any control scheme :) Consoles are over priced, and to restrictive. I haven't played a game on a console in 10 years.
#231 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1817 posts) -
[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

[QUOTE="Heirren"]I choose console. I just don't care to spend $26,000 on a game machine.Heirren

Why you so poor!

There's far more important things to spend money on.

I only spent $400 on mine, better value for the money then $300 for a console that doesn't do anything.
#232 Posted by AlexKidd5000 (1817 posts) -

[QUOTE="GamerwillzPS"]

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]£200 PC is not a PC built for the future, or even for the present in many circumstances.

seanmcloughlin

I'm pretty sure that a £200 PC can run games at low settings with 30-35fps and would still look better than consoles.

So consolites, care to explain why you think consoles are cheaper?

Maybe it would look better, but not by a whole lot. 1080p would be a good thing but that isn't factored into the price of £200. Honestly a £200 PC is NOT worth the money as it would be quickly outdated.

PC gaming IS expensive and I hate when people downplay that. It's more hardware expensive than consoles by far, but the thing is I don't find it a waste of money. If you do then that would explian why some people don't game on PC. it's not for them. But PC gaming IS for me and I don't need to justify the prices, it's well worth it IMO.

I'd rather pay $20-30 for games then $60. Console gamers get ripped off massive on the games. and thats what makes console gaming MUCH more expensive.
#233 Posted by mitu123 (154494 posts) -

I'd rather pay $20-30 for games then $60. Console gamers get ripped off massive on the games. and thats what makes console gaming MUCH more expensive.AlexKidd5000
So true, console gaming pisses me off because of their prices on games.

#234 Posted by Sailor_Enlil (1552 posts) -

[QUOTE="Sailor_Enlil"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

The PS3 is hardly infallible... Still, my 60gb is going strong. Yep, systems have games that don't release on other systems.

lostrib

Apparenly you only hear the vocal minority. Like I said my 4 year old PS3 still chugs along just fine. No problems whatsoever, never took it to the shop, nada. The only changes done to it was an upgraded Hard Disk (originally 80GB, now 320GB). And waiting for the next Project Diva release (Project Diva F for the PS3).

And you would be the vocal minority in terms of PC hardware breaking. Almost all hardware fails at one time or another. The PS3 is no different

Mind telling that to those customers I see around the mall having their PC's repaired? (there were like a dozen of them at that shop waiting in line to have their PC's repaired). On the other hand, console repair requests in the same place seemed rather scarce.

Oh and I just noticed another issue since I got this new mobo - the occasional sound distortion or "bzzzz" during heavy disk activity while any sound is being played (eg mp3 music, or the audio part of a video). I'm currently trying to investigate it (so far a number of Z77 owners seem to be reporting the same thing upon searching the web. hmm; again, my PS3 doesn't exhibit such problems).

#235 Posted by Sailor_Enlil (1552 posts) -

Is the PC gaming as optimized as console ?

Bebi_vegeta

Sadly, no. PC games must cater to the "lowest common denominator" in order to maximize sales (i.e. some Joe Public's old battered PC that runs 20 year old games). Catering only to the highest PC spec is a sure fire way to go out of business.

Can your console do everything the PC can ?

Bebi_vegeta

Dumb question. A PC is supposed to be, by original purpose, a Business Machine. One used in the office for office work (eg Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentations, Database, etc). A Console is an entertainment system - something for Video Games, Movies, etc. (the extra stuff it can do now, like web surfing, video streaming, etc, are purely extras). So it's apples-to-oranges comparison.

#236 Posted by Bebi_vegeta (13558 posts) -

Dumb question. A PC is supposed to be, by original purpose, a Business Machine. One used in the office for office work (eg Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentations, Database, etc). A Console is an entertainment system - something for Video Games, Movies, etc. (the extra stuff it can do now, like web surfing, video streaming, etc, are purely extras). So it's apples-to-oranges comparison.

Sailor_Enlil

I'm sorry but my PC is way more of a entertaiment machine then any console. It's a fact that it's way more complet system then your console.

#237 Posted by clyde46 (47009 posts) -

[QUOTE="Sailor_Enlil"]

Dumb question. A PC is supposed to be, by original purpose, a Business Machine. One used in the office for office work (eg Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentations, Database, etc). A Console is an entertainment system - something for Video Games, Movies, etc. (the extra stuff it can do now, like web surfing, video streaming, etc, are purely extras). So it's apples-to-oranges comparison.

Bebi_vegeta

I'm sorry but my PC is way more of a entertaiment machine then any console. It's a fact that it's way more complet system then your console.

This. A HTPC is a must for anyone who likes to watch films and TV shows.

#238 Posted by lowe0 (13692 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

[QUOTE="Sailor_Enlil"]

Dumb question. A PC is supposed to be, by original purpose, a Business Machine. One used in the office for office work (eg Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentations, Database, etc). A Console is an entertainment system - something for Video Games, Movies, etc. (the extra stuff it can do now, like web surfing, video streaming, etc, are purely extras). So it's apples-to-oranges comparison.

clyde46

I'm sorry but my PC is way more of a entertaiment machine then any console. It's a fact that it's way more complet system then your console.

This. A HTPC is a must for anyone who likes to watch films and TV shows.

What for? I can get Amazon or Hulu on either of my consoles, and I can stream music to them from my NAS (or a PC). What else do I need?
#239 Posted by ZombieKiller7 (6255 posts) -

"PC" as a "platform" exists only in the minds of technological ignorants, Steam fanboys and Gamespot.

#240 Posted by lowe0 (13692 posts) -

"PC" as a "platform" exists only in the minds of technological ignorants, Steam fanboys and Gamespot.

ZombieKiller7
No, it definitely fits the definition. There's an ecosystem of specific hardware, libraries, and services to support software, in this case the libraries support games specifically.
#241 Posted by ZombieKiller7 (6255 posts) -

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

"PC" as a "platform" exists only in the minds of technological ignorants, Steam fanboys and Gamespot.

lowe0

No, it definitely fits the definition. There's an ecosystem of specific hardware, libraries, and services to support software, in this case the libraries support games specifically.

Any OS running on any circuit board is not a platform.

#242 Posted by clyde46 (47009 posts) -

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

"PC" as a "platform" exists only in the minds of technological ignorants, Steam fanboys and Gamespot.

ZombieKiller7

No, it definitely fits the definition. There's an ecosystem of specific hardware, libraries, and services to support software, in this case the libraries support games specifically.

Any OS running on any circuit board is not a platform.

Prove its not.
#243 Posted by lowe0 (13692 posts) -

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

"PC" as a "platform" exists only in the minds of technological ignorants, Steam fanboys and Gamespot.

ZombieKiller7

No, it definitely fits the definition. There's an ecosystem of specific hardware, libraries, and services to support software, in this case the libraries support games specifically.

Any OS running on any circuit board is not a platform.

Correct. However, a given instruction set, protocols for interconnected hardware, and APIs to support development do together constitute a platform.
#244 Posted by Sailor_Enlil (1552 posts) -

[QUOTE="Sailor_Enlil"]

Dumb question. A PC is supposed to be, by original purpose, a Business Machine. One used in the office for office work (eg Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentations, Database, etc). A Console is an entertainment system - something for Video Games, Movies, etc. (the extra stuff it can do now, like web surfing, video streaming, etc, are purely extras). So it's apples-to-oranges comparison.

Bebi_vegeta

I'm sorry but my PC is way more of a entertaiment machine then any console. It's a fact that it's way more complet system then your console.

Good luck convincing my parents that. They love movies, but never had it in their mind to use a PC for it (they watch it on a traditional DVD player). Me? I watch movies on my PS3 as it can truely display 1080p very beautifully on my 42" TV; I really tried to do the same with my PC, but it never came out looking good at 1080p - too grainy or wrong aspect/size; and even videos looked awful (my PC's graphics only look good on the TV at 1366x768, and I must use VGA, not HDMI, which looks terrible coming from the PC). They only time I was ever able to achieve 1080p or higher on a PC properly was with an Acer 24" LCD PC Monitor (not a TV - a purpose built PC monitor - it uses DVI instead of HDMI; perhaps that's the reason my PC could work on 1920x1200 with it properly).

#245 Posted by ZetA_LatA (117 posts) -

In the long run you spend a lot less money on the PC (games are much, much cheaper if not free lol and no silly xbox live subscriptions). However sometimes choice isn't a good thing. A lot of people just want to pick something off a shelf, plug it in, and get going. With a PC you have to pick parts, assemble, install os, get new drivers, troubleshoot the problems that WILL come up, etc. It's a lot more involved than you'd have to be with a console.

But yes, with PCs you can have "next gen" graphics years before the next gen of consoles comes out, you can alter settings, use multiple displays, overclock parts to increase performance, play with obscene numbers of people at one time, mod and be encouraged to do so, and truthfully you don't have to spend over $1000 dollars to get a good gaming PC. Several friends of mine have rigs around $600-$700 that run most games just fine (not max but still rather well) which isn't altogether that much more expensive than the consoles were when they first came out.

However this is a debate the usually accomplishes nothing and will continue to do so until consoles inevitably become PCs themselves.

#246 Posted by menes777 (2643 posts) -

"PC" as a "platform" exists only in the minds of technological ignorants, Steam fanboys and Gamespot.

ZombieKiller7

What does it matter either way? Oh wait yes I see, you can say it doesn't count so your magic box goes up to 2nd place from 3rd.:roll:

#247 Posted by Sailor_Enlil (1552 posts) -

In the long run you spend a lot less money on the PC (games are much, much cheaper if not free lol and no silly xbox live subscriptions). However sometimes choice isn't a good thing. A lot of people just want to pick something off a shelf, plug it in, and get going. With a PC you have to pick parts, assemble, install os, get new drivers, troubleshoot the problems that WILL come up, etc. It's a lot more involved than you'd have to be with a console.

But yes, with PCs you can have "next gen" graphics years before the next gen of consoles comes out, you can alter settings, use multiple displays, overclock parts to increase performance, play with obscene numbers of people at one time, mod and be encouraged to do so, and truthfully you don't have to spend over $1000 dollars to get a good gaming PC. Several friends of mine have rigs around $600-$700 that run most games just fine (not max but still rather well) which isn't altogether that much more expensive than the consoles were when they first came out.

However this is a debate the usually accomplishes nothing and will continue to do so until consoles inevitably become PCs themselves.

ZetA_LatA

I wonder where your friends get such bargains. My latest PC upgrade alone (comprising of the Intel i7 3770K CPU and the ASUS Sabertooth Z77 motherboard) already cost me $670. From this store:

http://pcx.com.ph/components/processors/intel-core-i7-3770k-3-5g-8mb-22nm.html

http://pcx.com.ph/components/motherboards-1/asus-z77-sabertooth.html

#248 Posted by Led_poison (10143 posts) -
I love my dual monitor setup. I can have a screen dedicated to gaming, and other screen to the internet/music player/ etc or even have my xbox connected to the 2nd monitor
#249 Posted by ZombieKiller7 (6255 posts) -

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"] No, it definitely fits the definition. There's an ecosystem of specific hardware, libraries, and services to support software, in this case the libraries support games specifically.lowe0

Any OS running on any circuit board is not a platform.

Correct. However, a given instruction set, protocols for interconnected hardware, and APIs to support development do together constitute a platform.

Then you might as well call your platform "technology" because every circuit board and every device in the world is using the same loose confederation of standards.

#250 Posted by ZombieKiller7 (6255 posts) -

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

"PC" as a "platform" exists only in the minds of technological ignorants, Steam fanboys and Gamespot.

menes777

What does it matter either way? Oh wait yes I see, you can say it doesn't count so your magic box goes up to 2nd place from 3rd.:roll:

It matters because one is a product, the other is a hobby with no specific product.