Not everyone buys a TV when they first buy a console. Almost everyone owns a TV anyway. Am I right?Sabiancym said:
Why buy consoles?
- Thread starter Susurrus
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Susurrus said:
Guys, don't waste your breathe on Chibz. She's loaded enough to own 3 TVs, a Wii, an XBox360, a PS3, a DS and a PSP, and she wouldn't stop nitpicking about a mere $300 powerful multi-tasking PC because she is trolling you.Sabiancym said:
I stopped giving her any more attention after she said, quote, "SC2? Please. I wouldn't touch that (again) for fear of being tainted by its awfulness.", "HL is a Doom clone", and "I'm a former PC gamer who dropped PC gaming like it had super aids, and herpes. Also, ugly."
I mean, honestly. PC has super aids and herpes? Could you be more childish?
And why can't we assume that you already have a keyboard, mouse, monitor, hard disk, casing, etc considering that people today actually need PCs?the_green_dragon said:
Yes, I've a TV. But I would need to buy a separate TV for my 8-hour gaming sessions so that I don't hog my family's TV time.
Not everyone buys a TV when they first buy a console. Almost everyone owns a TV anyway. Am I right?
Ok, keyboard, mouse, hard disk, are all things we should all have, prob the casing too if your confident in removing your old motherboard and installing a new one. The monitor on the other hand. You can use a 15 inch CRT to surf the net, but to play games, you want 22 inch+ to have a decent chance at COD.Raiyan 1.0 said:
My point was it's pointless making such wide assumptions when trying to see something from an objective point of view. I don't watch TV, for example, and I still haven't changed my 10+ year old tiny Sony TV. I watch movies on my PC so that I don't have to shell out for a separate DVD player and I'll be getting a TV card pretty soon as well, for which I bought a 1080p monitor. I would have to buy a separate hi def TV if I want to buy a console today. So of course I would include that cost as well.the_green_dragon said:
For what its worth, it's probably the other way around for you. The cost of gaming will not be the same for everybody. Just ask the Aussies how much they pay for their games...
Lol, I am Aussie. I always wait for sales tho. I actually watch movies on my laptop, which is hooked up to my huge TV. But having a big TV has always been a must with me. Even without a console I would be watching movies a bigger TV. I can't watch movies on my PC because it makes my eyes hurt and plus I like to watch stuff with friends. Everyone is different and everyone has different tastes.Raiyan 1.0 said:
The very best reason to get a console over a PC is:
Social Gaming.
Having some friends over for a few beers and some Halo/COD/Fifa has become a very popular way to hang out these days. PC doesn't offer this. People will try to argue this, saying if you have two controllers for the PC etc etc, but in general, this doesn't happen.
Online gaming on Consoles is far more social than on PC. Everyone has a headset. Everyone can speak to each other. There's no teamspeak or ventrillo or skype needed. Those programs restrict talking to only the people who join that lobby. There are games that offer in-game chat on PC, but it's never used for some reason.
And also comfort - Sitting on a couch with a big assed TV playing a game is ten times more comfy than any sort of desk chair, no matter what kind you have.
Social Gaming.
Having some friends over for a few beers and some Halo/COD/Fifa has become a very popular way to hang out these days. PC doesn't offer this. People will try to argue this, saying if you have two controllers for the PC etc etc, but in general, this doesn't happen.
Online gaming on Consoles is far more social than on PC. Everyone has a headset. Everyone can speak to each other. There's no teamspeak or ventrillo or skype needed. Those programs restrict talking to only the people who join that lobby. There are games that offer in-game chat on PC, but it's never used for some reason.
And also comfort - Sitting on a couch with a big assed TV playing a game is ten times more comfy than any sort of desk chair, no matter what kind you have.
Raiyan 1.0 said:
It's not a matter of being "loaded". It's a matter of using the money wisely, finding good deals and saving when necessary. My entertainment budget is also ridiculous. Also, 2 of my TVs are pretty old.
It's all a matter of questioning whether PC gaming is a worthwhile investment.
I tend to exagerrate. OK, Starcraft 2 wasn't as bad as I stated. But compared to starcraft 1 it's pretty bad. Even the hardcore starcraft fans in korea aren't buying into it.
Half-life is a doom clone. Because "doom clone" is an archaic term for FPS. Anyone who says it isn't a "doom clone" doesn't know what they're saying.
As for saying I dropped PC gaming? My wonderful references to viral diseases is a reference to PC gamings two major flaws. 1. DRM and 2. Super openess.
DRM punishes legitimate buyers while the sheer (and harmful) openess of the system invites in ease of cheating. The fact that anyone you play against could (easily) be a cheater calls everyone you ever meet's achievements into question. It's the same situation as the tylenol recall of 1982. I can post more info on this if absolutely necessary.
The calling it ugly part is because it lacks games I want that my other real gaming systems can't play. The only game on it I like is Minecraft and (later on) Warhammer 40K Online. Most my other games are ancient, from the golden age of PC gaming.
Also I'm NOT going to update to Vista or 7. They're both terrible and can't run a substantial amount of games I want to play.
Ugh, I wanted to avoid doing this...
It's all a matter of questioning whether PC gaming is a worthwhile investment.
I respect your subjective opinions and the decisions you base upon them. What annoyed me was your arbitrary imposition:
I, Chibz, am saying that so few quality PC exclusives exist that it's not even worth talking about the idea of a PC exclusive.
Guess what? I think the Wii is a waste of investment, with its sub par hardware, constant remakes, shovelware and gimmicky games. The only thing good that came out of Nintendo was Earthbound. But do I rally around stating that as a fact and using it in objective arguments? Obviously there are people out there who find the Wii experience worth sinking their time and money into, so I don't spew my subjectivity while having a conversation based on economics and availability of certain goods.
While you have none, I've plenty of reasons to stay a PC gamer. I like my RTS and RTT titles. I like my mods. I like my small independent developers who don't have any place on the console market. I like my sims. I like my realistic manshoots with 64 player MP maps.
I tend to exagerrate. OK, Starcraft 2 wasn't as bad as I stated. But compared to starcraft 1 it's pretty bad. Even the hardcore starcraft fans in korea aren't buying into it.
Have you even played SC2? The gameplay is pretty much the same except for the addition of new units and full transformation to 3D. What's the reason for your dissent? Have you even played it considering you don't have a PC that's up-to-spec?
And haven't we already decided that hardcore fans of a franchise are not the best judges after the whole DA2 fiasco? Anyway, even the respectable folks at Gamasutra included SC2 in their GotY list. And it sold millions of copies, so it's not like hardly anyone's buying it.
I'm also saying that Starcraft 2 was designed by a company that has caused great harm to the gaming hobby/industry. Almost as much harm as Zynga. They're bad and they should feel bad.
Never explained why. Because they're successful? Shouldn't I say the Wii did a lot of damage to the gaming industry by devaluing games with their shovelware and making gimmicky motion sensor games a new trend?
Of course I don't. Because there's a market out there for games like these and I shouldn't impose my views on other people.
Half-life is a doom clone. Because "doom clone" is an archaic term for FPS. Anyone who says it isn't a "doom clone" doesn't know what they're saying.
No Chibz, you don't know what you're talking about. Let me quote the <url=http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Entryway>Doom wiki on the definition of a Doom clone:
<quote=Doom Wiki>Doom clones are games that mimic Doom's gameplay. In other words, most early first-person shooters ? due to Doom's popularity, a huge number of such games appeared soon after its release. The term "Doom clone" was in fact the common term for first-person shooters until the late 1990s.
Among games often counted as Doom clones are those based on the Doom engine, such as Heretic and Hexen (see Games for more). Others include Rise of the Triad, Dark Forces and Duke Nukem 3D.
Half Life let you have control over the z-axis. It was released in 1998, which is the late nineties. It's a proper FPS, not a Doom clone. Once again, did you actually play either HL or Doom?
Another reason I game on console: To avoid having to buy off Steam.
Who asked you to?
One reason why Steam provides such great service is because there's competition on an open platform. There's D2D. There's GG. There's Impulse. There's GoG. Can't say the same for the PSN and XBL. In fact, MS regularly <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/108588-Microsoft-Defends-Games-on-Demand-Pricing>bumfucks their customers with their monopoly.
And if digital distribution isn't your thing, there's always retail.
As for saying I dropped PC gaming? My wonderful references to viral diseases is a reference to PC gamings two major flaws. 1. DRM and 2. Super openess.
1.) Yeah, DRM's fucked up. But it's not unavoidable. If it's Steam, it's fine, since only one online check is necessary and there's no problem if the internet's out since I can play in offline mode. And if it's something from Ubisoft or requires GFWL, I just go download the cracked .exe, because fuck 'em.
2.) Dedicated servers. At 20 euros a month, a clan can easily handle it. And there are hacks and aimbots on the consoles as well.
The calling it ugly part is because it lacks games I want that my other real gaming systems can't play.
You have... serious issues with your choice of adjectives. And with the double negative, what did you actually mean? Games that neither exist on consoles nor on PCs... you want to play games that don't exist?
Maybe you're talking about your consoles' backward compatibility? Last I looked, the PC can run Genesis, NES, SNES, Saturn, Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, GameCube, Wii, GBA, NDS and PSP games through emulators. The only thing I miss are a couple of Japanese titles on the PS3.
Also I'm NOT going to update to Vista or 7. They're both terrible and can't run a substantial amount of games I want to play.
I'm tired of people spewing that bullshit. Vista was bad. But Window 7 was the best decision MS made this decade other than investing on the XBox. Win7 doesn't hog memory like Vista did (with Game Booster running, it takes up only about 300MB of RAM in the background of my PC as opposed to Vista's 1GB). It was a vast improvement over Vista and pushes 64-bit processing, which is the way of the future, and add in higher RAM allowances and a few nifty things like the slice tool and rotating background selection and you have a fairly good OS.
Give up on XP already - it's a decade old and it's infrastructure was never built to be secure on the internet, which is why it relied so heavily on antiviruses. Hell, Win7 is <url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10444561-245.html>more heavily secured than even Macs.
Halvar Flake, head of research and CEO of Zynamics: "General state of affairs: Vista/Win7 has more extensive countermeasures against attacks and a codebase with presumably fewer security issues.
Rich Mogull, CEO, Securosis: Microsoft has done more in terms of its inherent security features than Apple has in the operating system.
Charlie Miller, a principal analyst at consultancy Independent Security Evaluators: Technologically speaking, PCs are a little more secure than Macs. Macs have a larger attack surface out of the box (Flash, Java, support for a million file formats, etc.) and lack some anti-exploitation technologies found in PCs like full ASLR [Address Space Layout Randomization]. This means Macs have more vulnerabilities and it's easier to turn a vulnerability into an exploit on the platform.
Tyler Reguly, senior security research engineer, nCircle: If you believe the hype and the flashy commercials the answer would be Mac. But if you take a look at the two platforms, and the mindsets of the companies behind them then the PC wins hands down. If you compare Windows 7 to Snow Leopard, then the simple winner is Windows 7. Microsoft brought in teams of security professionals to look at their code and find problems leading to a more secure product while Apple is often criticized for ignoring issues.
And what games aren't you able to play on Win7? It has excellent backward compatibility and there's a thing called DOSBOX.
It's all a matter of questioning whether PC gaming is a worthwhile investment.
I respect your subjective opinions and the decisions you base upon them. What annoyed me was your arbitrary imposition:
I, Chibz, am saying that so few quality PC exclusives exist that it's not even worth talking about the idea of a PC exclusive.
Guess what? I think the Wii is a waste of investment, with its sub par hardware, constant remakes, shovelware and gimmicky games. The only thing good that came out of Nintendo was Earthbound. But do I rally around stating that as a fact and using it in objective arguments? Obviously there are people out there who find the Wii experience worth sinking their time and money into, so I don't spew my subjectivity while having a conversation based on economics and availability of certain goods.
While you have none, I've plenty of reasons to stay a PC gamer. I like my RTS and RTT titles. I like my mods. I like my small independent developers who don't have any place on the console market. I like my sims. I like my realistic manshoots with 64 player MP maps.
I tend to exagerrate. OK, Starcraft 2 wasn't as bad as I stated. But compared to starcraft 1 it's pretty bad. Even the hardcore starcraft fans in korea aren't buying into it.
Have you even played SC2? The gameplay is pretty much the same except for the addition of new units and full transformation to 3D. What's the reason for your dissent? Have you even played it considering you don't have a PC that's up-to-spec?
And haven't we already decided that hardcore fans of a franchise are not the best judges after the whole DA2 fiasco? Anyway, even the respectable folks at Gamasutra included SC2 in their GotY list. And it sold millions of copies, so it's not like hardly anyone's buying it.
I'm also saying that Starcraft 2 was designed by a company that has caused great harm to the gaming hobby/industry. Almost as much harm as Zynga. They're bad and they should feel bad.
Never explained why. Because they're successful? Shouldn't I say the Wii did a lot of damage to the gaming industry by devaluing games with their shovelware and making gimmicky motion sensor games a new trend?
Of course I don't. Because there's a market out there for games like these and I shouldn't impose my views on other people.
Half-life is a doom clone. Because "doom clone" is an archaic term for FPS. Anyone who says it isn't a "doom clone" doesn't know what they're saying.
No Chibz, you don't know what you're talking about. Let me quote the <url=http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Entryway>Doom wiki on the definition of a Doom clone:
<quote=Doom Wiki>Doom clones are games that mimic Doom's gameplay. In other words, most early first-person shooters ? due to Doom's popularity, a huge number of such games appeared soon after its release. The term "Doom clone" was in fact the common term for first-person shooters until the late 1990s.
Among games often counted as Doom clones are those based on the Doom engine, such as Heretic and Hexen (see Games for more). Others include Rise of the Triad, Dark Forces and Duke Nukem 3D.
Half Life let you have control over the z-axis. It was released in 1998, which is the late nineties. It's a proper FPS, not a Doom clone. Once again, did you actually play either HL or Doom?
Another reason I game on console: To avoid having to buy off Steam.
Who asked you to?
One reason why Steam provides such great service is because there's competition on an open platform. There's D2D. There's GG. There's Impulse. There's GoG. Can't say the same for the PSN and XBL. In fact, MS regularly <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/108588-Microsoft-Defends-Games-on-Demand-Pricing>bumfucks their customers with their monopoly.
And if digital distribution isn't your thing, there's always retail.
As for saying I dropped PC gaming? My wonderful references to viral diseases is a reference to PC gamings two major flaws. 1. DRM and 2. Super openess.
1.) Yeah, DRM's fucked up. But it's not unavoidable. If it's Steam, it's fine, since only one online check is necessary and there's no problem if the internet's out since I can play in offline mode. And if it's something from Ubisoft or requires GFWL, I just go download the cracked .exe, because fuck 'em.
2.) Dedicated servers. At 20 euros a month, a clan can easily handle it. And there are hacks and aimbots on the consoles as well.
The calling it ugly part is because it lacks games I want that my other real gaming systems can't play.
You have... serious issues with your choice of adjectives. And with the double negative, what did you actually mean? Games that neither exist on consoles nor on PCs... you want to play games that don't exist?
Maybe you're talking about your consoles' backward compatibility? Last I looked, the PC can run Genesis, NES, SNES, Saturn, Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, GameCube, Wii, GBA, NDS and PSP games through emulators. The only thing I miss are a couple of Japanese titles on the PS3.
Also I'm NOT going to update to Vista or 7. They're both terrible and can't run a substantial amount of games I want to play.
I'm tired of people spewing that bullshit. Vista was bad. But Window 7 was the best decision MS made this decade other than investing on the XBox. Win7 doesn't hog memory like Vista did (with Game Booster running, it takes up only about 300MB of RAM in the background of my PC as opposed to Vista's 1GB). It was a vast improvement over Vista and pushes 64-bit processing, which is the way of the future, and add in higher RAM allowances and a few nifty things like the slice tool and rotating background selection and you have a fairly good OS.
Give up on XP already - it's a decade old and it's infrastructure was never built to be secure on the internet, which is why it relied so heavily on antiviruses. Hell, Win7 is <url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10444561-245.html>more heavily secured than even Macs.
Halvar Flake, head of research and CEO of Zynamics: "General state of affairs: Vista/Win7 has more extensive countermeasures against attacks and a codebase with presumably fewer security issues.
Rich Mogull, CEO, Securosis: Microsoft has done more in terms of its inherent security features than Apple has in the operating system.
Charlie Miller, a principal analyst at consultancy Independent Security Evaluators: Technologically speaking, PCs are a little more secure than Macs. Macs have a larger attack surface out of the box (Flash, Java, support for a million file formats, etc.) and lack some anti-exploitation technologies found in PCs like full ASLR [Address Space Layout Randomization]. This means Macs have more vulnerabilities and it's easier to turn a vulnerability into an exploit on the platform.
Tyler Reguly, senior security research engineer, nCircle: If you believe the hype and the flashy commercials the answer would be Mac. But if you take a look at the two platforms, and the mindsets of the companies behind them then the PC wins hands down. If you compare Windows 7 to Snow Leopard, then the simple winner is Windows 7. Microsoft brought in teams of security professionals to look at their code and find problems leading to a more secure product while Apple is often criticized for ignoring issues.
And what games aren't you able to play on Win7? It has excellent backward compatibility and there's a thing called DOSBOX.
Well...
- PCs never really appealed to me as a gaming platform.
- I grew up on consoles and, as such, am more accustomed to them.
- using a keyboard and mouse feels awkward to me
- every game that's interested me (save for about 3) has always dropped on a console.
- I prefer to use my PC for tasks other than gaming, like video editing, and typing responses on forums such as this.
So... yeah. On that note, I've got some more practice to conduct in MvC3 (360 version).
- PCs never really appealed to me as a gaming platform.
- I grew up on consoles and, as such, am more accustomed to them.
- using a keyboard and mouse feels awkward to me
- every game that's interested me (save for about 3) has always dropped on a console.
- I prefer to use my PC for tasks other than gaming, like video editing, and typing responses on forums such as this.
So... yeah. On that note, I've got some more practice to conduct in MvC3 (360 version).
The wii has plenty of good exclusives. Monster Hunter 3 springs immediately to mind.Raiyan 1.0 said:
I actually have, at a friend's house. Identical to SC1? One sec.Raiyan 1.0 said:
You're right! Fans of a series don't know anything about a series! Let's ask the homeless people downtown for THEIR highly informed opinion of the classic metroid games!Raiyan 1.0 said:
It's called World of Warcraft. It's closer to cocaine than an actual video game. And yes, I've seen what WoW can do to people.Raiyan 1.0 said:
Yes, there's also a market for cocaine itself.Raiyan 1.0 said:
Yes. Quoting a site that proves me correct achieves... What exactly? I LOVE arguing with you. You do half my work for me!Raiyan 1.0 said:
<quote=Doom Wiki>Doom clones are games that mimic Doom's gameplay. In other words, most early first-person shooters ? due to Doom's popularity, a huge number of such games appeared soon after its release. The term "Doom clone" was in fact the common term for first-person shooters until the late 1990s.
Among games often counted as Doom clones are those based on the Doom engine, such as Heretic and Hexen (see Games for more). Others include Rise of the Triad, Dark Forces and Duke Nukem 3D.
Played both. Half-life is just an overblown POS that everyone loves for some reason.Raiyan 1.0 said:
Yes. They "bumfuck" you due to a monopoly that DOESN'T EXIST. You can buy hard copies of the game new or used for example. If you don't like the Games on Demand prices, don't BUY from games on demand. Is it REALLY that complicated?
You mean the retail copies I CAN'T BUY? You CAN'T buy games from retail. Walmart has a small rack (mostly ancient) games. Same with zellers. Toys 'r' Us has NO PC games. Future Shop has a couple. Rogers (Yes they sell games) only had Cataclysm. EB Games has a half rack for sale. Blockbuster has no PC games. Neither of them actually. Digital Distribution is almost the only way to get PC games. Period.Raiyan 1.0 said:
In fact, retail games are so non-existent my friends & I have a meta-game about it. "Find the PC gaming section". We're trying to find the largest/smallest available. EB Games actually has the largest. Rogers' has the smallest (Cataclysm). I don't count Toys 'R' Us due to utter lack of one.
Steam is nothing BUT DRM with a few neat little features added in. The fact you can't see is sad. Tragic really.Raiyan 1.0 said:
I'm talking about PC exclusives. Games that can only be played on the PC.Raiyan 1.0 said:
GTFO pirate. We don't take too kindly to your type 'round here.Raiyan 1.0 said:
Windows 7 is just more of the batshit backward stuff they pulled with Windows Vista. It's all the same stupidity.Raiyan 1.0 said:
I've found the backwards compatability to be absolute trash. And DOSBOX to be iffy at best.Raiyan 1.0 said:
It's funny how no one gets that consoles ARE DRM. Want to play multiplayer? Give me $50. Here's an xbox live arcade game, better hope we don't decide to remove it from the market because if you lose your data afterward you'll never have it again! Want to modify your gaming experience with community-made content? Too bad, we'll ban your console from connecting to the internet at all.
Consoles are the only trump card in the hackers vs publishers arms race that's been going on for a couple of decades now. In said arms race, hackers will always win on a PC. DRM is all about taking away your control. On a console, you have none.
And on an unrelated note, DOSBOX works beautifully on my Windows 7 64bit machine. I've been playing Mechwarrior 2 on it, which came out in '96, and it works just like it did out of the box. Frankly I'm amazed that my disk even works, I'm only three years older than it.
Consoles are the only trump card in the hackers vs publishers arms race that's been going on for a couple of decades now. In said arms race, hackers will always win on a PC. DRM is all about taking away your control. On a console, you have none.
And on an unrelated note, DOSBOX works beautifully on my Windows 7 64bit machine. I've been playing Mechwarrior 2 on it, which came out in '96, and it works just like it did out of the box. Frankly I'm amazed that my disk even works, I'm only three years older than it.
$50 for an xbox live ARCADE game? Oh wait, you mean Games on Demand. Yeah. Sort of like how if Steam goes down and you lose your data you'll lose your game forever. It's an inherit & deep flaw of digital distribution.Leeko said:
And the lack of control keeps out cheaters. I'm willing to give up some control of my console's software itself if it helps ensure games get released & people don't cheat vs me. A lack of cheaters is a HUGE advantage.
I was referring to the cost of paying an XBL subscription actually. It's $50 a year or something, isn't it? In any case, I've NEVER had a problem with cheaters with online PC games. Maybe your experience is different, but it doesn't strike me as a large issue.
I only play RTS games on my PC, because it's easier with the mouse. On my PS3, I play shooters, the controller makes it easier to handle. Also my computer was top of the line when I bought it, and it can run a few new games, but I need to have the best for the Duke...
No it isn't Steam has zero day patch that they will release if they go out of business unlocking your games. Hackers have moved on to consoles years ago and since no server admins are on consoles you are screwed, I have run into more hackers in recent years on LIVE and PSN vs PC counterparts of games.Chibz said:
I've actually never come across a single hacker on live or psn, but have seen entire PC games just littered with them.PettingZOOPONY said:
Also, Xbox live arcade/games on demand work without connection to xbox live. It's really not a very interesting or advanced feature.