Which is the worst fanboy war?
- Thread starter stormcaller
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Lies. The worst fanboy war has gone on for centuries, and is likely to continue too. The ultimate battle between fanboys of First World that subscribe to democracy and Keynesian economics VS Third World countries that favour more socialist ideaologies and economics.
1st World V 3rd World = perpetual war
1st World V 3rd World = perpetual war
I'm pretty sure someone else has said the exact same thing a lil' while back,funny.Kyuumi said:
I'm still going to have to stick with "PC vs. Mac vs. Linux" being the worst because there is no easy way to compare them.
With PS3 vs. X-Box 360 you can point out key differences that distinguish the two. PSN is free, but X-Box 360 has more game variety. While I'm sure someone will argue this, it's generally true.
But Mac vs. PC vs. Linux, anything can disprove anything you could try. Some people argue that "Mac is meant for more artistic types", but why? Photoshop may have originally come out on a mac, but has been on PC for ages. Plus there are tons of freeware photo editting tools for both systems, and it's VERY easy to find additional programs for Windows. The same goes for music. Some argue that PC's are cheaper for the same hardware. True, but then you need to take into account the easibility for a dumbass to collect, install, and/or customize their computer to get their hardware, plus how long will it last? And when you get into how long a computer last, that's individualized for EACH SPECIFIC PERSON, and then it's impossible to throw a blanket argument down such as "MACS SUCK" or "PCS SUCK". And that's only off the top of my head!
Linux is worse (to argue for or against), because of it's capability and customizability, yet requirement to work on it and know what you're doing. If you're looking for a pre-built computer then it's bad for you, if you're looking for MAXIMUM customizability no matter how long or how much work it takes then it's good for you, and if you're anywhere in-between then how can anyone (except yourself) say if it's good or bad?
All you can really say is which operating system YOU prefer or YOU recomend, not which is GOOD or BAD because it really depends on the person. It's impossible to win an OS fight because not only are most people ignorant of the other choices, they fail to see that it depends from person to person, need to need.
I use all 3, each for their own reasons and my own needs, so I've tried them all and none have stuck out as "AMAZING EVERYONE SHOULD USE THIS" or "TERRIBLE NO ONE SHOULD EVER USE THIS".
Except Vista. Vista sucks.
Kidding! =P
With PS3 vs. X-Box 360 you can point out key differences that distinguish the two. PSN is free, but X-Box 360 has more game variety. While I'm sure someone will argue this, it's generally true.
But Mac vs. PC vs. Linux, anything can disprove anything you could try. Some people argue that "Mac is meant for more artistic types", but why? Photoshop may have originally come out on a mac, but has been on PC for ages. Plus there are tons of freeware photo editting tools for both systems, and it's VERY easy to find additional programs for Windows. The same goes for music. Some argue that PC's are cheaper for the same hardware. True, but then you need to take into account the easibility for a dumbass to collect, install, and/or customize their computer to get their hardware, plus how long will it last? And when you get into how long a computer last, that's individualized for EACH SPECIFIC PERSON, and then it's impossible to throw a blanket argument down such as "MACS SUCK" or "PCS SUCK". And that's only off the top of my head!
Linux is worse (to argue for or against), because of it's capability and customizability, yet requirement to work on it and know what you're doing. If you're looking for a pre-built computer then it's bad for you, if you're looking for MAXIMUM customizability no matter how long or how much work it takes then it's good for you, and if you're anywhere in-between then how can anyone (except yourself) say if it's good or bad?
All you can really say is which operating system YOU prefer or YOU recomend, not which is GOOD or BAD because it really depends on the person. It's impossible to win an OS fight because not only are most people ignorant of the other choices, they fail to see that it depends from person to person, need to need.
I use all 3, each for their own reasons and my own needs, so I've tried them all and none have stuck out as "AMAZING EVERYONE SHOULD USE THIS" or "TERRIBLE NO ONE SHOULD EVER USE THIS".
Except Vista. Vista sucks.
Kidding! =P
Sony VS World.
Also most other console wars. I am multiformat man, lacking only a PS3 to complete the spectrum of current-generation consoles. But hey, my PS2 is ferpectly good.
Also most other console wars. I am multiformat man, lacking only a PS3 to complete the spectrum of current-generation consoles. But hey, my PS2 is ferpectly good.
I think its funny that you start off sounding so balanced and "what do you think" then stumble into saying that Halo isn't complex. Unless, you are comparing it to the version of Operation Flashpoint specially modified by Bohemia Interactive for Military Training Exercises, I think Halo has plenty of complexity - it just isn't 'surface complexity'. If it really was as simple as you offhandedly imply there wouldn't be such enormous replayability in Halo: Combat Evolved and the Multiplayer portions of the sequels.stormcaller said:
Agreed, Halo 2 & 3's Campaigns were overly linear. They were the Perfect Dark to Halo: CE's Goldeneye 007.
Genesis vs. Super Nintendo
There are more to mention, but that seemed to be really big growing up and it's my most memorable besides PSX v. N64 v. Saturn.
There are more to mention, but that seemed to be really big growing up and it's my most memorable besides PSX v. N64 v. Saturn.
Oh yay, you got me.Uncompetative said:
All I was saying is that it's the basic standpoint of why Halo receives so much crap, I like it even if it's a bit up it self. But you can't deny that as far as some FPS's it is a little more simplified.
PC's vs the consoles.
Mainly cause I feel duty bound to support the PC in it's war against agressors. And that's only because I'm way too miserly to pay money for something extra which can only game (ain't gonna use any of their other functions) when I can do it on my PC.....
ah well.
Mainly cause I feel duty bound to support the PC in it's war against agressors. And that's only because I'm way too miserly to pay money for something extra which can only game (ain't gonna use any of their other functions) when I can do it on my PC.....
ah well.
I agree. Though i havent seen alot of PC vs Mac wars, i do agree that Macs suck though.Zeeky_Santos said:
And yes Xbox vs PS3 can go on FOREVER.
I'm on the side of the 360's, although I'm not afraid to admit that the PS3 is a BIT better, I would pick the 360 anyday. This is probably cause in MY OPINION the 360 has a better lineup of games than the PS3. Though i guess its a little unfair since i like shooter games more than racing games. But that's MY opinion.
And i feel in no way objecting to all those who have PS3's, or forcing my opinons on others is something i should do. So i guess i'm not a fanboy.
Please don't start a war over what i have said.
