So what is the advantage of a console?

Recommended Videos

darlarosa

Senior Member
May 4, 2011
347
0
21
To me the console offers faster reactions and generally smoother game play for certain kinds of games. Plus I like having distinct places for things... the controller is the main thing but that is becoming irrelevant. However...my issues is I can't afford a gaming computer or anything, nor do I have the skills up upgrade the POS that I have...so
 

00slash00

New member
Dec 29, 2009
2,321
0
0
ElPatron said:
00slash00 said:
pc gaming is expensive
It's not.


00slash00 said:
and involves at least a decent amount of technical knowledge
It doesn't.
if you want to take full advantage of the benefits of pc gaming then yes, it is expensive. i mean maybe you have more disposable income than i do (highly likely since i work in theatre which pays way below minimum wage) but would you seriously make the argument that pc gaming is cheaper than console gaming. i spent about $300 on my ps3 and in the time ive had my ps3 i have spent probably between $500 and $800 on computer upgrades.

and yes, i do feel pc gaming requires a decent amount of technical knowledge. certainly more than console gaming does. i know a lot of console gamers who shy away from pc gaming because computer specs are just confusing to them.
 

the_green_dragon

New member
Nov 18, 2009
660
0
0
UnderCoverGuest said:
Anyway, had a few minutes free while enjoying breakfast, so figured I'd do a thought exercise and share my perspective on this issue. Not tryin' to "prove you wrong" or anything, Green Dragon!
Nah, it's cool UnderCoverGuest, I know alot of fanboys cry when you attack their console of choice.

I love my Xbox but I also love my PC, I'm playing Star Wars the old Republic at the moment and its freaking sweet (Free to play to lvl 15 and they're making it free to lvl 50 soon) but I also enjoy having mates over for a couch co-op game of borderlands or Halo.

Point is, they both have pros and cons and they both fill a spot in life.
 

marche45

New member
Nov 16, 2008
99
0
0
Personally,a few things.

1.I have no space for a desktop(Which is why i use a laptop).If i were to put a tower where one of my systems is(with would have to be a small tower) i wouldn't have space for a monitor,or have any place to put a mouse and keyboard.

2.Exclusives.I can't Play disgaea,UMVC3,Smash bros,or valkryia chronicles on a PC.

3.Social aspect.I know far more people who game on consoles over PC.

4.Compatibility.I can take the game out of my console,and i know it will work on my friends console.

5.Same screen gaming.Beat em ups with friends are always fun,also the occasional COD online game.

6.I have bad luck with computers.The game will run fine one day,then inexplicably lag the next.I might also have to fiddle around with the computer just to get it to work.

Thats just me though.
 

DustyDrB

Made of ticky tacky
Jan 19, 2010
8,365
3
43
The used market. That's pretty much it nowadays. I maybe just be a Wii U and PC guy next gen. I used to say convenience was a big plus for consoles, but that's not really true nowadays. Any problem you have on PC will almost for sure have hundreds of guides, faqs, and forums to assist you. And I don't really have that many problems anymore. So you can preorder online, preload. You can buy from GOG and then have 10293218093 copies saved on 91439843 devices for your convenience. Meanwhile, consoles keep adding more barriers. Online passes, activation codes, day one patches, system updates, wonky currency, sloppy online stores (seriously, look for recent DLC on Xbox Live. And enjoy sorting through the tons and tons of Rock Band tracks).
 

disgruntledgamer

New member
Mar 6, 2012
905
0
0
1. Convince ( Yes I could drag my PC down to my TV, but I don't want to)

2. Exclusives (Infamous, Uncharted etc)

3. No DRM and I don't have to put up with shit like origin.

4. Easier to buy physical copies.

5. I don't have to worry about system requirements, because lets face it unless you have recommended across the board don't even bother.

6. Optimization plug and play

7. Reserved I had a 7th but forgot it............
 

Solo-Wing

Wanna have a bad time?
Dec 15, 2010
3,642
0
0
Only thing that popped into my head right away was Dedicated Framerates.

Then I remembered Playing Dark Souls on the Xbox and threw that out the window.

So I guess... Exclusives?

... Yeah. That's it.
 

Joccaren

Elite Member
Mar 29, 2011
2,601
3
43
GunsmithKitten said:
Again, find me a PC that will run Sleeping Dogs on max with HD patch, minimum of 50fps, all for 300 or under, which is what I paid for my PS3, and I'll send my consoles to the electronics afterlife on my grill all on Youtube.

And yes, I know my PS3 can't do it, but if I"m going to invest and be one of you "master race" types, I want to at least have a machine that's past that point of criticism.
Well, I wasn't going to bother, but since you've still got this running:
Pretty much the same as last time, but from Ebay:

Motherboard:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ASROCK-960GM-GS3-FX-matx-/170854333448?pt=Schede_madri_per_PC_e_Server&hash=item27c7b63c08#ht_3358wt_906
$53.50

CPU:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMD-Phenom-II-X4-840-3-2-GHz-Quad-Core-HDX840WFK42GM-Processor-brand-new-fan-/130759349813?pt=CPUs&hash=item1e71dd5635#ht_500wt_1414
$40.00

Graphics:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/XFX-AMD-Radeon-HD-6950-HD-695X-CDDC-XXX-Edition-2GB-GDDR5-/230845950294?pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item35bf7da956#ht_1735wt_1397
$102.50

RAM:
Ok, I'm going to say one thing before I put this here, as I find this f***cking Hilarious.
This is 16Gb of RAM, which if memory serves your Motherboard will only be able to use 2 sticks - or 8Gb of. However, that's still double the previous build's, and what Sleeping Dogs needs.
Guess the price.
Go on.
Guess it.
$2.00
http://www.ebay.com/itm/4x4Gb-Kingston-Ram-1333Mhz-Mac-Pro-Ram-16Gb-in-total-Brand-new-/251143289430?pt=UK_Computing_ComputerComponents_MemoryRAM_JN&hash=item3a794e7a56#ht_500wt_1414


Now, you will of course have to pay for shipping.
The price without shipping is $53.5+$40+$102.5+$2 = $198.00
So, unless the shipping costs $102, its within the budget.

Of course, I'm not going to comment on the possible reliability of some of these parts, but substitute the $20 4Gb RAM in instead of the 16Gb $20 RAM and you're still only at $216. Add in the Motherboard or CPU from the previous and it'll only add up to $250 or so, which leaves a $50 leway if the GPU doesn't ship to your country to find another one online, and from a quick look on Ebay I was able to find another 3 or so, not including these two shipping to the United States for even lower prices than $102.50 :
http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMD-Radeon-HD-6950-1GB-Unlocked-Shaders-/230846369079?pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item35bf840d37#ht_500wt_1414
$64.99

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sapphire-AMD-Radeon-HD-6950-Dirt-3-Edition-2-GB-GDDR5-/180966035742?pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item2a226a911e#ht_500wt_1414
$88.00


Given more time, you could also look for second hand parts online. They, like second hand games, are often cheaper and generally not damaged - just something someone no longer needs after upgrading their own rig.

So, $198.00
$102 under your $300 budget.
 

The_Echo

New member
Mar 18, 2009
3,253
0
0
Honestly? The only advantage consoles have is console exclusives. Seriously.

And this is from a non-PC gamer. I run a Mac. A very crippled, only-kind-of-able-to-run Google Chrome Mac. (Though for some reason, Psychonauts runs flawlessly...) The majority of my gaming happens on a console.

Anything you can imagine as a plus for consoles can be done with a PC. Controller? Lots of PC games support controllers. And if not, there are plenty of programs to map your controller buttons to keys. Kicking back, gaming on a couch? Hook your computer up to your TV. ... What else do people say consoles can do over PCs? I forget.

But seriously. Exclusives, that's it. Or, at the very least, that's all I can think of.
 

Joccaren

Elite Member
Mar 29, 2011
2,601
3
43
Akalabeth said:
"PS3" or "Xbox"

is easier to remember than

4 GB Dual core
Radeon ATI 7500 card
etcetera and so forth.
This is lack of knowledge on most peoples part.
Generally even a 6 year old processor will run modern games reasonably well, despite what the Recommended requirements might say. My friend has been running the same single core processor for 7 years or so now, and only notices lag in heavy RTS gameplay or Dwarf Fortress.
RAM is generally a non-issue as well, as if memory serves the OS will begin paging to your harddrive - which is significantly slower, but does allow games to be played. Generally though, most - if not all - computers will have 2Gb RAM, the minimum required to run most - again if not all - games, though not the recommended to load up the large textures on higher graphics settings.
Even then, RAM is so cheap these days that you should have at least 4Gb in your PC IMO anyway, though thats another discussion.
Really, the main thing that you need to worry about is the Graphics card, and that's easy:
Nvidia +#
Radeon/AMD +#
If your # is greater than the one on the box, your set. If its less, your not, much like comparing a PS2 to a PS3.


And as for actual PC gamers, let's again look at DOS Box.
A game I mentioned in my previous post is Renegade Legion: Battle for Jacob's star. It's like Xwing or Wing Commander in its gameplay style, but it doesn't run. Not without some sort of virtual environment.
And your Wii will run a SNES game?
No?
Well, you can't even install a virtual environment to run that, so I guess PCs come out on top there.

Tring to run a DOS game on Windows 7 or so is like trying to run a SNES game on the Wii. Its not going to work, and is the same problem for both PC and console.

So if a guy can MAKE money, making a configuration file don't you think that's credence to the fact that maybe it's not very accessible? That most people aren't going to bother and try to figure out something like dosbox.
I had an issue with DOSbox once, I spent 10 minutes searching on Google and I found the response I needed. Of course, I've always been good at looking for things on Google, and this still falls under my "Trying to run a SNES game on the Wii" argument.

This shit isn't accesible to the averag gamer. If it were, people would not be able to make money off of it. So to say that "Backwards compatibility" for the PC is a boon is a joke becuase it's not accesible, particularly not if you have an obscure game.
That really depends on how far back you want your backwards compatibility to go. I can play PS1 era games on my PC with no compatibility patches, just right click and 'Run in Windows ME comparability mode", and "Run as Administrator". Nothing hard about that.

The basic Console rig is more affordable. There are sales on the console just as there are on the PC. There is the option to trade in games on the console, which is NOT on the PC.
Basic PC rig for me has always been more affordable. I can't spend $300 on a console [Or $1000 over here on release if I'm reading these articles right], plus the price of a TV to plug it into. I can however spend $200 on a graphics card if need be. It all depends on the situation you're in, which makes it a non issue.
There is also the ability to trade in some games on the PC, hence why my local EB has a "Second Hand PC game" bin. Its not as common on consoles, but getting a $60 game for $2-$10 isn't that common on a console either.

Hahaha, "Pretty Graphics don't make stories any better" yet you're probably someone who in another thread would say that "PC is better because of the graphics, durr".
Compare the graphics boost offered by a Bluray CD and that offered by a PC, and tell me which one is greater.
Bluray will boost your Resolution up to 1080p or so. PC will boost your resolution to 2560*1600 resolution whilst simultaneously adding extra shaders, higher quality textures, greater draw distances and a whole lot more.
Granted its something the PS3 has on the Xbox, but compared to the PC Bluray is largely irrelevant. You can just store high res movies on your harddrive, and you wouldn't have to swap CDs like an Xbox anyway, so Bluray doesn't help much there at all.

Either way, whether you care about Blu Ray or not doesn't matter. Other people do.
This I'll agree with.

And one doesn't need top graphics to play a game, in your post you also say you can still play BF3 with your rig. I'm betting it's not at full settings. So why do you say it helps your argument to play with shitty graphics on your PC, but when a console plays with shitty graphics on a TV it's a bad thing? You can't have it both ways.
Probably the same reason a lot of console players will say that you don't need to have good graphics to enjoy the game, then bash the Wii because it doesn't have good graphical capabilities.
For me, its because even on the lowest settings, a PC game looks better than a console game.
It has a higher resolution, generally better framerate, Anti Aliasing, Anisotrophic Filtering, and other forced GPU enhancements that consoles do not have. Hell, with a 7 year old PC I was playing BF3 at Medium settings - far better than what a console could hope to offer. Sure it wasn't max, but it doesn't need to be to look better than a console.

Oh, so your computer actually cost 430 quid not 250 right? Because you know, you sort of needed a monitor am I right?
Well, you didn't factor in the price of your TV into your prices, only 300 for the Xbox and 4 games.
As shown above, a $198 computer that absolutely kills a console in terms of power. Were I to factor in the price of my $50 monitor, I doubt it would add up to what your TV cost. And then I can buy 4 games off Steam for <$10 and we'll call it even.

PC Gamers always talk about upgrading when they talk about the cost their gaming takes, but you have to take the perpsective of someone who's never had a gaming rig in the first place, someone who maybe doesn't even have a PC at all in the first place. And no, a guy's not going to hook his computer up to a TV. I've never met anyone who does that. I'm sure someone out there does, but that cannot be used as justification for saying the PC is cheaper.
I'm going to quote you here [Or at least I think it was you] "Just because you don't do it doesn't mean nobody does". It still counts as an advantage for the PC that its versatile enough to be plugged into a TV should you wish to, cutting out the cost of a monitor. And I don't know a single one of my friends or their families who don't have a PC linked up to their TV. Its just too convenient. Instant access to all your movies, photos, music, games and everything else, and the ability to do work without leaving the living room.
Speaking of experience, that is something that factors into Consoles too. For all that you talk about not knowing how to assemble/upgrade a PC, I wouldn't have the slightest idea on how to plug a Console in. I've never done that. I also wouldn't have a clue about how to navigate XBL or PSN. However, playing Lego with my PC is easy as I'm familiar with what goes on there. Its not hard to learn - probably about as hard as setting up a console. It might be more tedious, though the fact that you don't have to buy a new console and set that up when the next generation is released counteracts that IMO. Which is easier to set up is up to personal experience in this case.

Yeah I'm sorry but live interaction trumps all of those.
Face to face Interaction > Skype > Phonecall/Teamspeak > Texting/Internet/whatever > Annoying your friends with stupid requests on facebook to feed your cows.

I prefer quality interaction.
So do I, hence why my friends all bring their laptops over and we have a LAN party every now and then. We probably have more face to face interaction than half the console players I know, as they will play CoD or something and sit on their couches speaking into their mikes as its easier and more convenient for them. Again, personal experiences.

"Split screen competitive"? Fuck off. Don't stack questions to avoid obvious answers that would otherwise defeat it. Howabout ANY multiplayer that you can play in the same room at the same time:

Tekken
Street Fighter.
Mortal Kombat
Soul Calibre
Blaz Blue
Lego Harry Potter / Star Wars / Pirates / etcetera

Any fighting game.
Other games this generation

Resident Evil 5
Halo
Any Wii Party game
Probably any Sports game
Blood Bowl
etcetera the list goes on . .
Same for PCs. You can every PC release made in the same room on your laptop, wirelessly connecting to each other via LAN. Does everyone need to have their own laptop?
Well, yeah, but I don't know someone that doesn't, just like most console players friends will also own a console.
If someone doesn't have a laptop, we'll either hit up some emulators for splitscreen, or go for games like Leiro or other games that can be played on the one laptop/PC without any trouble. They AAA games? No, but they don't need to be to qualify.

I'm talking about GAMERS playing. Not the ability to do it.
I've never heard of any TWO GAMERS playing at the same computer. I think I did it once maybe, with Star Control 2 oh and Rise of the Robots. Some PoS fighting game.

With consoles, it's common place.
I go to my brother's house, the kids play multiplayer games on the Wii. Dancing games. Racing games. Lego Star Wars games. etcetera and so forth.
Again, personal experience. Most people I know play their consoles solo, whilst my friends and I spent pretty much an entire year in 08 playing on the same computer at school. Just because you don't do it doesn't mean nobody does.
 

Get_A_Grip_

New member
May 9, 2010
1,012
0
0
The console itself is cheaper than a gaming PC.
Couch.
When I buy a game I know it'll run as I don't have to worry about specifications and drivers and the like.
I prefer console controls for action, driving, and fighting games, and some shooters than a mouse and keyboard.
 

Joccaren

Elite Member
Mar 29, 2011
2,601
3
43
Sober Thal said:
First thing I have to say:
Qua?
WTF you on about with half of that.

Firstly: "It cost you less than $300 6 years ago?"
No, it cost me around $500 then. However, 6 years ago here the PS3 was released for $1000. Which is cheaper?
The Xbox was $650 or so [You could get it for $500 without a harddrive, remote or ethernet cable, however].
Again, which is cheaper?
You put current console prices, I'll put current PC prices.
You put the console prices at that time, and I'll put PC prices at that time.

"Oh wait, you said this: -'$300 that could run today's AAA games? Nope.'-"
Actually I said I made a $300 upgrade on my PC this year, and my PC before the upgrade was able to run todays AAA games.
Quote:
Joccaren said:
I've already used that False meme, so I'm not going to put it here again.
My PC runs AAA games and it cost me $300 to upgrade. Of course that upgrade was overkill, and it ran AAA games before that, but it was starting to get 30 FPS on Maximum settings for newer games, so I upgraded.
Note how I said I upgraded my PC for $300, and it ran AAA games before that.

"EDIT OH WAIT!!! YOU TAKE ON THE CURRENT EXISTENCE TIME CHALLENGE BASED ON YOUR LAST POST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
I'm not even sure what you mean by this.

"K, kid... you just admit hat you can't make a gaming PC for less than X amount of dollars today, but then claim it as cheaper to do it many yeARS AGO?"
Where and when did I say this.
I have proven it is possible to make a gaming PC for $198, and I never once said it was cheaper in the past.

"Fuck that noise, you be trollin.

STFU"

You have already admitted that you are the one trolling, though I would ask you to at least read what I write a bit more carefully, as this post seems to be based of your unwillingness to do so.
 

Kathinka

New member
Jan 17, 2010
1,141
0
0
GunsmithKitten said:
ElPatron said:
[small]Well I'll be damned, because to play games you don't have to do that.[/small]

Isn't it great?
So, the motherboards, cards, processors all install themselves? Fascinating.


It's not.
Again, find me a PC that will run Sleeping Dogs on max with HD patch, minimum of 50fps, all for 300 or under, which is what I paid for my PS3, and I'll send my consoles to the electronics afterlife on my grill all on Youtube.

And yes, I know my PS3 can't do it, but if I"m going to invest and be one of you "master race" types, I want to at least have a machine that's past that point of criticism.
jesus fucking christ! now i'm going to, just to make the smug ignorance stop (yeah, like that's going to happen..)

Geforce 9800 GTX ~ 55 bucks
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 or AMD Athlon II X2 260 ~ 40
2 gigs ram ~ 15

brings us to 110 so far. you can use the rest on the other necessities like some generic case (ca 20), mainboard (depends, for this setup i wouldn't go higher than 25), some small-ish hard disk (maybe another 15-20) and a low-watt power source (meh, lets be a big spender and say 30). the rest you can blow on peripherals to your liking.

should run sleeping dogs on 1920x1080 with high details. even with 4x or so anti aliasing, though you could forfeit that at this resolution and instead get a more fluent experience, or maybe crank a few details up to ultra via ini tweaks.

will you PLEASE cease the butthurt now and inform yourself before you throw nonsense into the room? thanks.
 

Joccaren

Elite Member
Mar 29, 2011
2,601
3
43
Get_A_Grip_ said:
The console itself is cheaper than a gaming PC.
As shown above I can make a gaming PC for $198 [Or upgrade, but you don't buy a new TV every time you buy a new console do you?]

And...
You can play PC games sitting on your living room couch too.

When I buy a game I know it'll run as I don't have to worry about specifications and drivers and the like.
Already covered this with personal experience, and lack of willingness to learn. Its about as hard as learning to differentiate between an Xbox 360 and a Xbox in the way of games, or an Xbox and a Wii.

I prefer console controls for action, driving, and fighting games, and some shooters than a mouse and keyboard.
You can plug a controller into your PC and use console controls should you wish.
 

Joccaren

Elite Member
Mar 29, 2011
2,601
3
43
Kathinka said:
jesus fucking christ! now i'm going to, just to make the smug ignorance stop (yeah, like that's going to happen..)

Geforce 9800 GTX ~ 55 bucks
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 or AMD Athlon II X2 260 ~ 40
2 gigs ram ~ 15

brings us to 110 so far. you can use the rest on the other necessities like some generic case (ca 20), mainboard (depends, for this setup i wouldn't go higher than 25), some small-ish hard disk (maybe another 15-20) and a low-watt power source (meh, lets be a big spender and say 30). the rest you can blow on peripherals to your liking.

should run sleeping dogs on 1920x1080 with high details. even with 4x or so anti aliasing, though you could forfeit that at this resolution and instead get a more fluent experience, or maybe crank a few details up to ultra via ini tweaks.

will you PLEASE cease the butthurt now and inform yourself before you throw nonsense into the room? thanks.
Whilst you and I know that the 'recommended' system requirements are generally a load of bull, and a far lower rated PC can run what it recommends without too much trouble, it is generally wise to stick to the recommended system requirements when putting out a build for those without PC experience, as that is where they'll generally look for that info, and for Sleeping dogs it specifies a Quad Core with 4Gbs RAM and at least a 6950 for graphics.

Speaking from experience though, that build should work. A very similar one was able to run Crysis at second to max settings at 60FPS+ consistent, or at max settings for an hour at 60FPS before the RAM started getting used up by some memory leak or other, and it slowed down to 24-30FPS.