Do the console gamers have misconceptions of pc?

I'm a consolite because I'm not a pc fanboy? I actually do most of my gaming on pc. No need to be so mean.

Input lag and response time are two separate things. http://www.displaylag.com/exposed-input-lag-vs-response-time/

Input lag is more noticable with a mouse than a controller. Mouse allows faster cursor movement, faster turning etc so of course the lag would be more noticable. Low fps is more tolerable with a controller as well.

Some people are so sensitive to input lag they still use crt's for playing fps. Some people are so insensitive to lag they don't even notice when a game isnt using a hardware mouse cursor.

Of course I would never normally connect a pc to hdtv cause once you try a 120hz monitor it's hard to go back to 60.

@Cranler go and try Shadow warrior. after playing it you will realise how COD damage to FPS genre and this game highlight everything bad about todays FPS.

Maybe not detectable to you. A lot of smartphones now have much higher ppi's than even 4k tv's. Galaxy Note 3 has a 5.7 inch screen and is 1080p res. That's the equivalent of having a 21 inch 4k monitor when it comes to pixel density.

Also optimal viewing distance of a 26" monitor would be different than a 55". I use a 27 inch for pc gaming and I sit about 1.5 feet away from screen. When console gaming I use a much larger screen and sit at the same proportional distance.

I've watched walkthroughs and was very underwhelmed. Serious Sam seems much better.

Many people like campaigns that at least try to resemble a real firefight. Like enemies using cover for instance. Human enemies in Shadow Warrior just stand still in the open. Practically every game with shooting now tries to mimic real firefights from GTA to CoD .

I remember when I first played Vietcong, enemies took cover and the game had leaning, iron sites and even a cover system and it worked great.

If I'm in the mood for over the top action Serious Sam is my go to.

you have watched not played. its easily best FPS in years. i cant think of any one that is better recently.

Why is it the best fps in years?

because its old school FPS. no regen health, cover. fast paced non stop fun. throwback to what make FPS great. i could go on and on.

That's great for you. Most people like a little more realism. That's why arcade fps are no longer the norm. The only reason Doom and Quake were ever popular is because realistic shooters weren't around yet. Medal of Honor AA was the beginning of the end for old schol fps.

LOL. Medal of Honor and COD realistic?? d u even know what realism is?

and yes. old school FPS are now revieve (thanks flying wild hog) now doom 4 is coming out next year.

i'm not saying response time = input lag, but id does depend from it, input lag also depends on post processing effects, but most people don't even activate the advanced features in their tvs. Also i'm saying you are a butthurt consolite because all you do is spread bullsh1t about pc, that you would know if you actually had one but is ok consolites like to talk without having a clue and you act butthurt over pc in every single thread, keep trying.

What bs? Monitors are better for gaming than tv's. Plus you can get monitors at 120 and 144hz which is far better than 60hz in even non gaming applications.

Would a consolite bring up hardware mouse implementation?

Cranler, you havenot replied me yet. how is MOH and COD are realistic?

In CoD enemies at least take cover so it somewhat resembles a real firefight. Enemies just stand still in the open or rush you in old shcool fps. Most of todays fps games find a good balance between realism and tedium. Most people will find simulators like Arma a little too realistic.

Doom 4 is just one game.

so enemy take cover make game realistic? its just as arcadey or even more than Doom.

Doom 4 is one game but probably better than most FPS we have seen today. that and obviously next game flying wild hog will make.

I liked Hard Reset more.

Though I haven't finished Shadow Warrior yet.

rofl nice evasive, BU BU BU BU you can get 120hz monitors! ofc you can we are talking about regular tvs and monitors at 60 hz and you just ran out of arguments about input lag, keep spreading the bs!

hard reset have better core gameplay/gunplay but it lack variety and was too short.

they should make hard reset 2 more open, more variety, better pacing like shadow warrior. than it will be one hell of the game.

The only time I've seen input lag while playing games is when I still hooked up my PS2 to my 1080p HDTV and when I hooked up my PS2 to my PC TV tuner card. I haven't had any input lag with my PC hooked up to three different HDTVs (2 x 1080p, 1 x 720p) when using the VGA and/or DVI ports on the TVs.

@uninspiredcup said:

Every time a console gamer talks about pc they bring this up.

With the Praysration 4's and the XboxOne, isn't the difference in visuals not negotiable to the point of "who gives a shit"?

Wouldn't an argument of the pc's strengths over consoles be that, rather than movie games with barely any gameplay

It can utilize the mouse and keyboard as "learning forward on a chair" as opposed to "learning back on a couch" nature to produce mature sophisticated games well above what consoles can, or will ever produce?

Do the main two consoles even have "sophisticated" games with "depth" "learning curve" or "complexity"?

We just prefer consoles get over it.

I already linked a list comparing input lag between monitors and tv's but you only see what you want to see. I didn't say but, I said plus.

Input lag is always there even with the fastest crt monitors. Whether you notice or not is another story.

Why can't console games have "real" scale and "cinematic" game play without having "no" game play?

Look at this my fellows, huge, epic scale. Visual showcase (that runs on low end hardware more so than even PS3) yet depth complexity and accessibility? All controllable with ease.

Compared to a "masterpiece" (of shitness) you just push "forward" button.

Yet the console people praise it. Non game. Waste of time.

Here's another biased gameplay comparison.

My friend, this didn't even make logical sense, also I didn't watch them as my videos are probably better anyway.

So comparing a cinematic stealth game to a rts makes more sense than comparing 2 shooters?

It was a pretty deep point, it's understandable trouble would arise.

Extra PCgamer Olive Oil

Being older, I can afford and thus enjoy playing both. So whats your problem?

i think yes. for me, pc's are frustrating when it comes to non gaming things. gone are the days of win 95, 98 & xp which were far more user friendly. i used to play a lot of pc games until my sister broke my pc....and its been several years since ive had one of my own

i have reservations about it because i am not tech savy, and have never fixed a pc problem by simply going on google. i just want a plug and play experience, and consoles still do a far better job of that imo. i want to get into pc, but i am not tech savvy and not really a tinkerer. i feel like i would f@ck that thing up. i want a smooth gaming experience....

and i know a lot of pc gamers say im wrong for thinking this.

@rexpowercolt said:

Being older, I can afford and thus enjoy playing both. So whats your problem?

My problem is that you are not letting that meow meow outside!

@rexpowercolt said:

Being older, I can afford and thus enjoy playing both. So whats your problem?

My problem is you need to take the nerd stuff down off the walls and go out and get laid...

The reason I don't game on PC is because I'm garbage with a keyword and mouse. With a controller I'm a million times more coordinated/better. I know you can use controllers on PC games but if your playing a FPS online you're basically playing with a handicap.

For single player games I don't want to sink a ton of money into a PC. Easier to just buy a console.

^reasons why I game on consoles over PC^

@Motokid6: Trolling nerds.

BOOM!

Wut? ;-) I don't know whether to smile or ROFL.

@rorytmeadows said:

@rexpowercolt said:

Being older, I can afford and thus enjoy playing both. So whats your problem?

My problem is you need to take the nerd stuff down off the walls and go out and get laid...

i suppose you typed that mid-ejaculation?

It's a fact that you miss many games if you only game on PC. Same if you only game on consoles. But not as many as PC. Several PC games are actually coming to consoles now that they are powerful enough to run them.

@rorytmeadows said:

@rexpowercolt said:

Being older, I can afford and thus enjoy playing both. So whats your problem?

My problem is you need to take the nerd stuff down off the walls and go out and get laid...

you know people who have any kind of self esteem don't have to hide anything to get laid? you on the other hand seem to try too hard to get anything.

Oh crud. You are the belligerent idiot that trolls on every single GameSpot article, and constantly at that. Please leave, we have enough of your kind in SW.

say wut? i have the same gf since i was 13 yo, she spent her youth watching me enjoy freaky stuff like anime and gaming and yet she still loves me, get on my level, i don't have to do "socially acceptable stuff" for people to like me, i do what i enjoy. Also never been victim of bullying but you sure seems like you are :(

Get some self steem, grow a pair and stop trying so hard, maybe one day some girl will pity sleep with you xD

Lol, what a loser

cool story bro

I don't know about you, but from my experience, MS has seemed more concerned with protecting the user from themselves as opposed to making it more user friendly. Every iteration I need to find where they hide the things I use (simple things like showing and editing file name extensions). This isn't user friendliness, it's user nannying, and it's rather annoying. They just call it more user friendly.

So "it" fires up an old alt account just to come to a thread and call someone a virgin? lmao. Also is that post flag worthy? Seems like it should be.

Yes

PC gaming couldn't have gotten any worse than the time of Win 9x because both hardware and software were in transition from old standard to new. PC hardware standards were in transition: motherboards from AT to ATX, expansion slots from ISA to PCI, graphics slots from ISA to both PCI and AGP. Then there was IRQ hell. You had to micromanage your hardware carefully unlike today if all you care about is for the hardware to simply work.

On the software side, the transition was from MS-DOS to Windows 95 and then Direct X. A whole generation of coders had to make the move and some did well. Others didn't. Games were a mish mash of of MS-DOS and native Win 95. There was also the move to 3D-acceleration which had several competing standards at the time. There was the Rendition way, 3dfx way, PowerVR way, and of course, the MS way. You can add OpenGL to the mix.

Windows Explorers now in Windows 7 and 8.1 aren't that markedly different from Win 9x. The Folder Options are still there:

@jun_aka_pekto: Yeah, I know it's still there, it was just an example off the top of my head. My point was that each iteration, they move things around and hide things that use to be more readily available. Also, I was more specifically talking about windows, not really the hardware or programming aspects of PC's (though it's still possible to run into odd hardware incompatibilities).