| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Out of the 5 most current consoles, what's your favourite? |
| Nintendo Wii |
|
5% |
[ 5 ] |
| Nintendo DS |
|
10% |
[ 9 ] |
| Xbox 360 |
|
44% |
[ 38 ] |
| Sony PSP |
|
2% |
[ 2 ] |
| Sony PS3 |
|
36% |
[ 31 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 85 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Fly
Status: Offline
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 1774
$poons: 250.40
Location: Melbourne
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Spacebreak wrote: |
And as far as PC goes...when it comes to gaming its so user-unfriendly, especially regarding specs and mods and stuff. When I put a game into a console, I want it to work with no questions asked. |
"When I buy a Nintendo console I expect it to play Nintendo games"
We assume generational change with Nintendo where the above opinion would be treated as foolish and moronic, yet at the same time we treat the same as fact;
"When I buy a PC game I want to play it on a PC"
In regards to the PC format. Unfriendly? Only with upgrading and only if you don't pick the right the right time and hardware to do so.
Would you play NES carts on your Wii? No Wiiware, no dlc physically putting the cart into the Wii and making it run?
Where you observe static generations as friendly others may see rolling generations as friendly. With the releases of Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 a PC gamer does not need to plug in a preexisting system to play the previous games like a console player would before then playing the new release.
What I'm trying to say is user-friendly is relative, yes specs are progressing far too fast for a lot of people to enjoy every game at peak performance. But I mean come on if the industry was so unfriendly why port the kb&m? Why start using firmware? Internet? Wave goodbye to mmos in their entirety because massive multiplayer is PC unless you decided to try daisy chaining multiple multitaps to get more than 4 people, wireless, gtfo, extended menus, sure if you think start 17 buttons start again is more user friendly than pressing I scrolling and enter, DLC content, do I even need to point it out at this point?
All relative to friendly and enjoyment in a gaming experience where both deserve praise and negativity but neither deserve to be excluded in a comparative sense.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IISpacebreakII
Status: Offline
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 2911
$poons: 10.40
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Fly wrote: | | Spacebreak wrote: |
And as far as PC goes...when it comes to gaming its so user-unfriendly, especially regarding specs and mods and stuff. When I put a game into a console, I want it to work with no questions asked. |
In regards to the PC format. Unfriendly? Only with upgrading and only if you don't pick the right the right time and hardware to do so.
Would you play NES carts on your Wii? No Wiiware, no dlc physically putting the cart into the Wii and making it run?
Where you observe static generations as friendly others may see rolling generations as friendly. With the releases of Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 a PC gamer does not need to plug in a preexisting system to play the previous games like a console player would before then playing the new release.
What I'm trying to say is user-friendly is relative, yes specs are progressing far too fast for a lot of people to enjoy every game at peak performance. But I mean come on if the industry was so unfriendly why port the kb&m? Why start using firmware? Internet? Wave goodbye to mmos in their entirety because massive multiplayer is PC unless you decided to try daisy chaining multiple multitaps to get more than 4 people, wireless, gtfo, extended menus, sure if you think start 17 buttons start again is more user friendly than pressing I scrolling and enter, DLC content, do I even need to point it out at this point?
All relative to friendly and enjoyment in a gaming experience where both deserve praise and negativity but neither deserve to be excluded in a comparative sense. |
Atleast if I have a game from a previous console all I would have to do is wack out the console without paying anything except a little effort.
Its the upgrading factor that kills it for PC, why should I have to be forced to have to upgrade my PC just to play a game I want when the required hardware is often more costly then the game I want to play? The problem with PC game designers these days is that they all feel like they have to 1 up the last best game and so we have this massive train of competitiveness and continuous upgrading which for some is too costly.
| Quote: |
"When I buy a Nintendo console I expect it to play Nintendo games"
We assume generational change with Nintendo where the above opinion would be treated as foolish and moronic, yet at the same time we treat the same as fact;
"When I buy a PC game I want to play it on a PC" |
Let me rephrase it then, when I buy a game for something I want it to work no hassles when I shove it in I want to get home and play it, I don't care if its on the shoddiest piece of hardware going, if it works its good, not saying its just the PC though, my wii had dust which prevented brawl from working. However with the Wii thats a flaw, when it comes to PC you either have the choices
a)get better specs
b)suffer the game with lower graphical settings
I really just don't want to be hassled with all this crap. And saying that too, I just bought a new $1700 about half a year ago computer and its already been outdated games wise. Oh what a fun 2 months I had and it can't even run assassins creed.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JleeLink
Status: Offline
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 301
$poons: 85.00
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
PC should really be there and I consider it personally as the best platform to play games. So much more options and customisable things and the aspects of a good free online service where 90% of games additional content is free. Theres also mods and plays FPS games absolutely the best and online where there is always a lot more people playing than for consoles. Also the mass variety of games to play and also because PC can do so much more than a console.
I also own a Wii since launch and to me is the worse of this generation which i know sounds like a very harsh comment, as most of the games are below average and for myself there are barely any games i want to play either than Zelda (which was on the cube) and the average Brawl with broken online (most of the time) and felt more like an expansion pack to melee. And then there isnt much to look forward to in the future as its all going to be centred to nintendos massive causal market.
| Spacebreak wrote: |
I really just don't want to be hassled with all this crap. And saying that too, I just bought a new $1700 about half a year ago computer and its already been outdated games wise. Oh what a fun 2 months I had and it can't even run assassins creed. |
Wow you must of gotten ripped off badly as I bought my pc just over a year ago for around the same price and it plays assassins creed perfectly and almost all new games on maximum.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IISpacebreakII
Status: Offline
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 2911
$poons: 10.40
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
I agree what you guys are saying about how PC is best when it comes to FPS, mods and stuff, but half the time the technical limitations and specs just kill it for me as I don't have the money to constantly upgrade :[
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin Ogaris
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 10616
$poons: 1588.60
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
You don't need to constantly upgrade, that's what people are saying. I can guarantee if you spent 2000 now, the computer you buy will play games for the next 3 years, while not quite a console lifecycle, it still isn't a bad investment given everything ELSE that can be done on a PC.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IISpacebreakII
Status: Offline
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 2911
$poons: 10.40
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Sin Ogaris wrote: | | You don't need to constantly upgrade, that's what people are saying. I can guarantee if you spent 2000 now, the computer you buy will play games for the next 3 years, while not quite a console lifecycle, it still isn't a bad investment given everything ELSE that can be done on a PC. |
Thats my problem though, you have to really know this spec building industry really well to get a decent deal, with 2000 bucks most of you guys will find a way of getting a really decent computer. As I said before with $1700 I got a computer that can't run assassins creed, and I'm completely foreign to this whole spec industry. Tonnes of people talk about geforce8800s or something and Im like LOLWOT?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LordPaludis
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Oct 2003
Posts: 562
$poons: 3.90
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Spacebreak wrote: | | Sin Ogaris wrote: | | You don't need to constantly upgrade, that's what people are saying. I can guarantee if you spent 2000 now, the computer you buy will play games for the next 3 years, while not quite a console lifecycle, it still isn't a bad investment given everything ELSE that can be done on a PC. |
Thats my problem though, you have to really know this spec building industry really well to get a decent deal, with 2000 bucks most of you guys will find a way of getting a really decent computer. As I said before with $1700 I got a computer that can't run assassins creed, and I'm completely foreign to this whole spec industry. Tonnes of people talk about geforce8800s or something and Im like LOLWOT? |
Maybe before you spend $1700 you should research it a bit? There are plenty of good sites around, such as http://tomshardware.com which has various CPU and GPU ranking charts so you can pick the best one for the money. I admit it's not as easy as going and buying a console but it's really not that hard.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fly
Status: Offline
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 1774
$poons: 250.40
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Spacebreak wrote: |
Atleast if I have a game from a previous console all I would have to do is wack out the console without paying anything except a little effort.
Its the upgrading factor that kills it for PC, why should I have to be forced to have to upgrade my PC just to play a game I want when the required hardware is often more costly then the game I want to play? The problem with PC game designers these days is that they all feel like they have to 1 up the last best game and so we have this massive train of competitiveness and continuous upgrading which for some is too costly. |
I agree with that in a sense, consoles are hardware limitation to force generational change whereas PC's are arguably more software based which in turn leads to shorter generations and possibly more money spent. However discounting the peripheral markets additional pricing for consoles also narrows the margins a bit in regards to costs, as well as the region of said software it's speculative that the PC costs more as some of that cost could be absorbed to the "region free" attachment.
We all place worth on associations, so while yes the majority of pricing would be chewed up in upgrading one also has to consider how much money people are attributing to the base package "extras"which are then charged for on consoles.
| Quote: | Let me rephrase it then, when I buy a game for something I want it to work no hassles when I shove it in I want to get home and play it, I don't care if its on the shoddiest piece of hardware going, if it works its good, not saying its just the PC though, my wii had dust which prevented brawl from working. However with the Wii thats a flaw, when it comes to PC you either have the choices
a)get better specs
b)suffer the game with lower graphical settings
I really just don't want to be hassled with all this crap. And saying that too, I just bought a new $1700 about half a year ago computer and its already been outdated games wise. Oh what a fun 2 months I had and it can't even run assassins creed. |
It's understandable and really should be done where any end user regardless of their understanding could be given a product that wouldn't effectively be outdated in a year or two, you wouldn't find very many PC gamers who are happy with the inherent speed of the generational changes since it frees up money for other expenses he longer a system lasts. It's really just with respect the PC has been a media centre for decades and Sony and MS come out with "we're so awesome we have media centre capabilities" and people suddenly think it's as awesome as sliced bread, screw you PC?
We're not inherently faulting the argument that constant upgrading diminishes enjoyment for individuals, just that those who dismiss the PC when comparing current generation for such reasons, we're merely saying that like with any purchase really research is taken for granted, enjoyment is relative to the individual and on a semi biased note, PC gamers are more often going to give specific help for purchases in regards to a system than fanboyish responses for a console "zomg Sony r liek arrogent get da 360 it roxxorz!!". So it's not a dig at your enjoyment of the medium, but the inherent argument that it is and has to be that way period.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lapzod
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 2133
$poons: 555.70
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| LordPaludis wrote: | | Maybe before you spend $1700 you should research it a bit? There are plenty of good sites around, such as http://tomshardware.com which has various CPU and GPU ranking charts so you can pick the best one for the money. I admit it's not as easy as going and buying a console but it's really not that hard. |
What Sin is getting at here is that he doesn't have to worry about researching a new computer just to play games. All he has to do is buy the console, and it's fine for the next 4 or so years.
As for not that hard, he has to buy the parts he needs, then he needs to either install them himself or pay someone else to do it, where as previously mentioned, a console needs none of that.
Personally, I don't really think the PC should be included in the console arguement, but that's more because I very rarely play games on mine anymore. Infact, I still have an AGP graphics card...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3mt
Status: Offline
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 1578
$poons: 327.90
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
an advantage of the console is that developers are forced to use the hardware limitations. I wish that that this would also happen to PC game developers, instead of placing more and more polygon counts and special effects that take require the latest graphic card and processor to run.
Ahh, back in the days of pong and space invaders, PC game developers were forced to think outside the square in order to produce in-game effects. Now developers just shove processor hungry code into the game engine without refining it to be able to run on lower end hardware. I'm sure that if developers actually took time to refine the code and optimising it for speed, games like crysis could actually run on my rig.
I still recall the 0.99mhz computer back in the 1970s and 80s, that could produce realtime graphical effects, due to clever usage of code and design. The 0.99mhz computer would never had been able to run such programs if it wasnt for the optimisation of code.
I read an article once, saying how programs are so cumbersome. Sure, our computers are 10,000 times more powerful than twenty years ago, but then shouldnt our computer be able to do 10,000 more things instead of 1000 times more? It proves how developers are not taking into account the actual structure of the program.
So i'd just wish game developers won't just rely on new, insanely powerful hardware releases to satisfy their game requirements. Think outside the square and wonders can be done to games. Things that are impossible will be within limitations to achieve.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin Ogaris
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 10616
$poons: 1588.60
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't UT3 insanely optimised and runs on everything under the sun practically?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheMixta43
Status: Offline
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 80
$poons: 10.80
Location: Canberra, Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
PS3: MGS4
_________________
 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Appel
Status: Offline
Joined: 08 Nov 2007
Posts: 2583
$poons: 34.60
Location: Mt Eliza, Melbourne
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| lapzod wrote: | | LordPaludis wrote: | | Maybe before you spend $1700 you should research it a bit? There are plenty of good sites around, such as http://tomshardware.com which has various CPU and GPU ranking charts so you can pick the best one for the money. I admit it's not as easy as going and buying a console but it's really not that hard. |
What Sin is getting at here is that he doesn't have to worry about researching a new computer just to play games. All he has to do is buy the console, and it's fine for the next 4 or so years.
As for not that hard, he has to buy the parts he needs, then he needs to either install them himself or pay someone else to do it, where as previously mentioned, a console needs none of that.
Personally, I don't really think the PC should be included in the console arguement, but that's more because I very rarely play games on mine anymore. Infact, I still have an AGP graphics card... |
Oh yeah... still rocking the MX440!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Azza
Status: Offline
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1819
$poons: 117.80
Location: Perth
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Kurupt wrote: | | 360 because it has games that are worth playing lolololololol |
You mean great exclusive titles like Halo 3...and...uuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmm...errrrrrrrrrrr...ooooooooo...
_________________
Facebook | Youtube | XBL Gamertag: Comrade Azza | Steam ID: Comrade_Azza
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THEMAN
Status: Offline
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 3526
$poons: 719.80
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
PS3 for the win. My xbox360 is now a HD-dvd play on the best of days. Been doing all my gaming on PS3. 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Canis-Rufus
Status: Offline
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 464
$poons: 139.60
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Not really sure.
I do most Online gaming on the PS3. Though I got my first Gold Account on the 360, so thats been on lately. I do have a Wii, but its hardly ever on due to lack of games.
If I really had to choose. I suppose the PS3. Because I just love the thing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IISpacebreakII
Status: Offline
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 2911
$poons: 10.40
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Im quite shocked at how this voting has turned out, lots of PS3 love is good to see ^^
Hahhaha Azza your good for a laugh!!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G3ck0
Status: Offline
Joined: 09 May 2008
Posts: 7516
$poons: 3.80
Location: Brisbane
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
I guess the PS3 because one word: LittleBigPlanet.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vervain
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 5659
$poons: 0.00
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Azza wrote: | | Kurupt wrote: | | 360 because it has games that are worth playing lolololololol |
You mean great exclusive titles like Halo 3...and...uuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmm...errrrrrrrrrrr...ooooooooo...
|
Ummmm lets see if I can lengthen that list. Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Project Gotham 3+4, Ninja Gaiden 2, Viva Pinata, Gears of War, Naruto: Rise of a Ninja, Forza 2. Then there's timed exclusives like Bioshock, Mass Effect, Lost Planet, Eternal Sonata Virtua Fighter 5 and various others I'm too lazy to copy out.
Those are the titles that are out if we extend into not yet released games then we have: Gears of War 2, Fable 2, Viva Pinata 2, Forza 3, Naruto The Broken Bond, Banjo Kazooie 3.
Um is that a long enough list of good* exclusive titles?
*Good being an average rating or at least 75% on gamerankings.com
_________________
http://www.play-asia.com/SOap-23-83-6u9h.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G3ck0
Status: Offline
Joined: 09 May 2008
Posts: 7516
$poons: 3.80
Location: Brisbane
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Out of that list, there isn't many I liked. I liked Viva Pinata, thought Gears of War was ok, same with PGR 3. Bioshock is alright.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vervain
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 5659
$poons: 0.00
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Sambo110 wrote: | | Out of that list, there isn't many I liked. I liked Viva Pinata, thought Gears of War was ok, same with PGR 3. Bioshock is alright. |
I'm not shocked really. The fact is that not everyone is going to like every game. My one gripe is that Azza is basically saying that because he doesn't like the Xbox as a whole, which is the way he came off, then obviously the 360 mustn't have any good games and so I decided to write a list of games that are pretty darn good by most people's standards.
_________________
http://www.play-asia.com/SOap-23-83-6u9h.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G3ck0
Status: Offline
Joined: 09 May 2008
Posts: 7516
$poons: 3.80
Location: Brisbane
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Vervain wrote: | | Sambo110 wrote: | | Out of that list, there isn't many I liked. I liked Viva Pinata, thought Gears of War was ok, same with PGR 3. Bioshock is alright. |
I'm not shocked really. The fact is that not everyone is going to like every game. My one gripe is that Azza is basically saying that because he doesn't like the Xbox as a whole, which is the way he came off, then obviously the 360 mustn't have any good games and so I decided to write a list of games that are pretty darn good by most people's standards. |
But you left out Halo 3 and Halo Wars? I don't really like the 360, but it does have some good games. Like Viva Pinata, Halo 3, Vegas 2 (which sucks on the 360)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vervain
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 5659
$poons: 0.00
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Well Halo 3 had already been mentioned by Azza himself and to be honest I forgot Halo Wars. Not a huge fan of Halo to be honest. I haven't played much in the way of FPS's which is something I plan on fixing in the coming months.
_________________
http://www.play-asia.com/SOap-23-83-6u9h.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ANDYBALLINA
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 3461
$poons: 977.20
Location: Ballina
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Bioshock is fantastic. So is Gears of War. Xbox 360 has more range than PS3 Sambo
_________________
PSN: ANDYBALLINA1
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zhou
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
Posts: 4555
$poons: 382.11
Location: Summoner's rift
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Sin Ogaris wrote: | | Isn't UT3 insanely optimised and runs on everything under the sun practically? |
pretty sure it wont run on computers with integrated intel graphics chipsets..
well ..
not Nativley anyway ...
you could probably run it with
3d anaylse..but unless you had enough ram to support it,
it would be total lag fest
_________________
My flickr
i7 930 | 6gb ddr3 Ripjaws 2000 | GTX 560 | 1tb 7200rpm WD |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
