Entrenched in The Console Wars!

[curlycrouton]

Console warriors (and the related PC snobs) are basically wastes of carbon. There is no one "best" platform; there's the platform(s) that best meet what you want/need, but that's a personal choice. It's also an old game, given that the same petty impulses went on in the auto wars (seriously, buying something just because it's a Ford/GM/Chrysler/Toyota?) and newspaper wars and silly fanboy slapfights over TV series.

And yes, I'm going to repeat my mention of the PC snobs because they're so thick they bring their own narrow-mindedness into a *console* thread. Seriously, grow up children and stop arguing which is the best box of magic sand... and get on with playing the games, which is the point of having one of these things, right?

-- Steve

I'm a PC, and I think consoles are glorified toys.

 

[shatnershaman]

Its only a war between thousands on internet forums and the few execs that present at E3.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

And yes, I'm going to repeat my mention of the PC snobs because they're so thick they bring their own narrow-mindedness into a *console* thread. Seriously, grow up children and stop arguing which is the best box of magic sand... and get on with playing the games, which is the point of having one of these things, right?

I'm a PC, and I think consoles are glorified toys.

Good for you; I guess I'll have to make an exception for a 'bot ("I'm a PC") that can pass the Turing Test... but I'm a human being who plays games instead of platforms and I'd say that if such an opinion was held by a fellow meat-being, it is foolish and not constructive.

-- Steve

 

[nuwanda]

PS3 has undoubtably the best hardware although suffers in terms of amount of games and pricing.
360 has nice specs and a wide range of games as well as the best online support but notable reliability issues.
Wii has the worst hardware but has the best games for when they're beer and friends. Maybe not so fun when you're on your own?

That's not a console war, it's like a console Venn diagram.

Whole heartedly agree. A gigantic Venn diagram that cycles with whichever console has the best/most hyped games out at the time.

 

[Uncompetative]

My 360 has RROD'd twice under the now extended 3 year warranty. This time around I decided to keep the box UPS returned it in.

Yet, if this third 360 were to fail out of warranty I would probably buy another one (salvaging the removable Hard drive) for £130 + free game from Amazon. Annoying, yes, but I would need some way to play my Xbox game collection:

Halo: Combat Evolved, Halo 2 Multiplayer, Halo 3 Multiplayer
Far Cry Predator: Instincts, Far Cry 2
Grand Theft Auto III, GTA: Vice City, GTA IV
Call of Duty 2, COD 4
Battlefield 2: Modern Combat, Battlefield: Bad Company
Frontlines: Fuel of War
Counterstrike
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Black Arrow
Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter

Half Life 2, Half Life 2: Episode One, Half Life 2: Episode Two
Team Fortress 2
Portal

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
Thief: Deadly Shadows
Dark Messiah of Might and Magic
Oblivion

Mass Effect
Star Wars: Battlefront
Battle Engine Aquila
Lost Planet
Bioshock
Prey
Condemned
Dead or Alive 3

Project Gotham Racing 1, 2, 3 & 4
Burnout

Crackdown
Skate
Jet Set Radio Future
Mirror's Edge {pre-ordered for the 14th}

N+
Geometry Wars
Robotron
SWOS

I used to have more, but I sold the one's I didn't like that much, like Just Cause (spoilt by dodgy aiming).

Don't get me wrong. There is a point to this longish list. Because despite having these games (and some for the N64), that is it.

So, no DS, Wii, PS2, PS3, or PSP for me.

Sad face.

No, not really.

However, that doesn't stop me yearning to experience these titles, if only once...


Okami - Wii
Animal Crossing - DS
Loco Roco - PSP
ICO - Playstation 2
Shadow of the Colossus - Playstation 2
Little Big Planet - PS3

...but, sadly I'm not that rich.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Yeah my 7900gtx lasted 2 years before being replaced so far my 2006 computer has only had a hardrive change (i mean £58 for a 500gig why not) and graphics card.
Bar crysis the 8800gtx from november 2006 still keeps up with games even nearing 2009 a lot longer than 6 months Pc's simply last longer if you spend enought to start with i.e a £1500 computer from 2006 i.e my rig is still going strong mainly thanks to the backwards compatability of the PCi-e x16 bus

 

[Chickenlittle]

I personally only own a (broken) 360, but I can say that I prefer it, because it's all I've ever played regularly. Hand me a PS3 or Wii, and I'll likely be disappointed.

You prefer a broken console to either of the other two? That's wierd.

It's the bias. It's what I've used most, so I(and most folks) tend to stick with what is familiar.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

Yeah my 7900gtx lasted 2 years before being replaced so far my 2006 computer has only had a hardrive change (i mean £58 for a 500gig why not) and graphics card.
Bar crysis the 8800gtx from november 2006 still keeps up with games even nearing 2009 a lot longer than 6 months Pc's simply last longer if you spend enought to start with i.e a £1500 computer from 2006 i.e my rig is still going strong mainly thanks to the backwards compatability of the PCi-e x16 bus

While I agree that the whole 'six month replacement' quote that often gets thrown around about PCs is ridiculous, pretty much everyone says they have a one or two year old computer as a testament to the amount of time they last before obsolecsence. Compare this to the eight year average life span of a 'console generation'.

I have a friend who is a perfect example off the PC crowd (in terms of diehard prederence). He claims that he is evidence that you don't need to update your computer once every six months. However, when asked what the most graphically powerful game is that he can run, he answers Half-Life 2. Which is a last generation game.

 

[Syphonz]

I bought my PC when Doom 3 came out. It instanly ran it on ultimate, to this day, I can run Crysis on maximum settings. I've only ever had to replace 2 sticks of 512RAM with 2 1Gigs of RAM and that was because the RAM got torched.

 

[Demir23]

Honestly, the whole console war malarkey has come to be because of the system's, games', and accessories' high prices forcing most gamers to focus on only one or two of the systems. This in term caused them to proclaim that their choice(s) was superior in order to make themselves feel better about their choice. Oh, and people hate it when other people are happy, especially when they're happy with something different. That hatred and jealousy has a lot to do with it too.

 

[Jumplion]

One problem of the potential for PCs is that so many different models of different things pop out everywhere and developers wouldn't be able to fully maximize a certain graphics chip or a motherboard (whatever, work with me here!) unless they put alot if not all of their effort to maximize efficiency. However, since consoles usually have the same set of pieces, developers can maximize efficiency over a good period of time hence the PS3 allegedly only using 30-40% of it's full power on games now.

Atleast, that's how I noticed it. Oh how I love these learning circles! They go around forever!

Though it's still ironic since we're getting into a PC vs. Consoles war 'ere.

*sigh*

Why do you think this exists?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX

Blech, I couldn't even download DX9 on my computer because of some compatibility issue, and I thought DX was [ignorant bastard] just something for graphics wasn't it? [/ignorant bastard]

 

[Atrer]

Its an unnecessary debate over something that will be completely irrelevant probably 3-5 years from now. Very very irritating waste of time these console 'wars'.

 

[PersianLlama]

I'm wondering in general as to why anyone at all chooses sides in The Console Wars.

I'll start by saying that I think the idea is quite silly actually. I have all three consoles and I can't say I like any one more than the others. I can say I use my 360 the most for gaming, the PS3 the most for media, and the Wii... well I use it and I like it, I just don't use it as much as I would like.

So my first question is: If you have enough money to own more than one console, why would you "choose sides" with one console or the other?

I've seen PS3 owners bashing truly good 360 games and the only thing I can think is that they are jealous, or in this case, too immature to buy both consoles and have ALL the games they like. The same can be said for 360 owners of course, if you need to see examples of this kind of behaviour, check out the recent bullshot that happened on Metacritic. Xbox fanboys gave thousands of poor reviews to LBP, and in retaliation, Sony fanboys did the same to Gears 2. Or the other way around, I honestly don't know who started it, but either way they're all idiots. Or another example of truly rediculous fanboy-ism, check out sonydefenseforce.com.

Maybe not everyone thinks they're good?

 

[Jumplion]

DirectX is what allows developers to worry about making a game and not making a game have to work with certain GPU's or motherboards or whatever. Sure, they still have to worry about scaling down or up system settings, but so do console developers who make multiplayer games.

And both the PS3 and Xbox 360 have already been pushed to 100% of their possible power. Why do you think so few games render at 1080p?

What about the "SUPAH CHIP!" of the PS3? Or the "BELUH-RAY!"? GPUs arn't everything (which, yet again, I forgot what they do >_>; ) Ps3 is hardly from it's limits, many developers who work on the 360 have said that they're "stretching it's limits" or whatever, and Uncharted was only using about 30% of the PS3's power (allegedly, I always take everything with a grain of salt or whatever).

And if both PC and Console developers have to worry about the same thing then.....wait, I don't get what you were saying there. What were you referencing there?

 

[Jupsto]

its platform wars. dont forget the PC elitist pricks who think all console gamers are 10 year olds with ADHD. although to be fair you dont get many kids PC gaming, xbox live is thriving with the immature.

it comes down to choice. personally prefer PC and xbox because they get the most good games. nobody wants to programm games for the ps3, even if it is better. and wii games are fun but are virtually all for kids and grannies.

also once you go keyboard and gaming mouse for shooters you can't really go back.

 

[Jupsto]

Advantages/disadvantages of each system:
+raw power -lack of games for the ps3
+online -reliability for the x360
+low cost -extremly shallow games for the wii
+all of the above -requires brains to operate for the pc.

To everybody whining that a late 2007 pc can't run early 2008 games: update your drivers and find a decent spyware remover. See the above fallout exemple on how effective it is.

I agree with BUT while you can buy a decent PC for cheap, making a PC which will run games as smoothly as ps3/360 would cost you alot more than the console [and never really run as smoothly since windows is a pile of poo and crashes]. PC games are cheaper but usually buggy.

but if you have lots money, patience for windows and tech know-how PC really is the best. only thing it really fails at is "splitscreen" or offline multiplayer