Nope, I won't. I see no reason to spend 400$ for something that will perform much worse than a PC and make me pay more money per game bought. I could buy 70-80 games on Steam for the same money. It's just not worth it for the couple of interesting games I won't get to play.

360 was in no way better, nor did it have better looking games. I had a single-core Pentium with a 6600gt at the time and that could run Gears of War with better graphics, better resolution and better framerate than the 360.

If Valve wanted to get some exclusive games for it's service, they could very easily do it. Hell, they don't even have to buy a game from another company: they could easily make Half-Life 3 a PC and Steam exclusive and force the tens of millions that have already bought a Half-Life game onto the platform.

But that's not the Valve ethos. Gabe Newell has said many times that he wants everyone to be able to enjoy games and that he doesn't like closed platforms. He really is that much of a nice guy and that's why people love Valve.

What Kinthalis said. I want the best available version, so PC it is.

It is largely Intel's fault that casual gamers turned towards consoles. Back in the day you only had to worry about your PC processor, if you had a good one then you could also game like the best of them. Then discrete graphics came about and Intel decided to create crappy integrrated graphics that couldn't play Minesweeper without frame skipping. Luckily, this problem will be resolved very soon as the next generation of CPUs will all have decent GPUs embedded. That basically means that your run-of-the-mill 400$ cheapo laptop will be able to play games withn better-than-console quality.

well I hope they learned something, funny how I havent heard any comments from them after they bombed lol.

TerrorRizzing

Yeah, they were quick to tell off PC gamers when the alpha version was leaked, they were absolutely sure the move to consoles would give them 5x more sales and that clearly didn't happen. Maybe the DX11 patch for Crysis will salvage their reputation, who knows.

Crytek made the game on a vastly higher budget compared to the original (they said so themselves). They released the game on three platofroms, spent a ton of money on marketing and advertising and they barely managed two thirds of the sales of the original so far. The game doesn't have any legs whatsoever because it now has a terrible reputation in the PC community. It's a pity, because I've heard that it's quite a fun game. I hope that Crytek learn from their mistakes and design their next game with the PC as the lead platform.

Witcher 2 looks much better than this even on medium-powered PCs. I don't see anything impressive in that video to be honest.

Nothing wrong with these scores, those games really are that good.

People will be gaming on PCs long after the consoles' death.