Why can't we have both?

[Joccaren]

Because its fun to argue, and most people don't have enough money to buy 3 $3-500 consoles, plus a $400-$2000 PC, so they can only choose one.

That and not everyone has a use for both. I have no need for a console. The exclusives don't interest me, I have nowhere to put one, and everything else I can do on my PC better. Some people have no need for a gaming PC, not having room for one, and not being interested in the games it plays.

I will agree both have their place though. It all depends on the person, and if you're one of the people that has a use for both, more power to you.

 

[Vegosiux]

Gaming wherever you like it or not is an expensive hobby, and people who barely scrape by shouldn't really be getting into it.

It really, really doesn't have to be.

Locust gaming is expensive, the kind of gaming where you don't play to enjoy, but to consume, to burn through a quantity without regard to quality and detail. And if that's how you like your gaming, more power to you, it's a valid choice for people to make, just not the choice I would make.

I like my games paced a bit slower, to explore every nook and cranny, to mess around and generally have a good time, and aim for 100% completions in the end. I like to replay the good games, to me it isn't "play and forget". For example, my average Mass Effect 1+2 playthrough was 120 hours combined, taking ONE Shepard from start of ME1 to end of ME2. And I didn't really have much trouble with failing on any section, that didn't eat up my time; and I played that three times.

There are not enough hours in a day to do that with every 'big' title on the market, much less mixing in all the good indies, even if I had all the money in the world and played games 24/7.

So yes, I'm limited in my gaming budget, limited to a mere 86400 seconds per day. Do I want to play everything? No, I don't, because on that limit, if I play everything, I won't be able to appreciate anything.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Because people tend to only see things in a black and white, if your not with me your against me kind of way. Kind of narrow minded if you ask me.

 

[The_Lost_King]

I've said it before, but I'll say it again; because arguing is fun. Forming cliques and trying to club other cliques to death is part and parcel of human nature. We've just evolved the concept to a point where we type mean things at each other instead of hitting each other with big rocks, which I'm pretty sure is an improvement (I'm far too lazy to go around hitting people with rocks).

Saying "have both" is valid, and is probably what a good number of people do, but that isn't fun, so screw, choose your side and unto the breach you go. Especially if someone comes on a board and says 'I haven't got the money to afford a new console and a decent gaming PC, which should I choose?". There are converts to win, by God! Ready the cannons, rally the cavalry, deploy the tech comparisons, run the price-per-year analysis; we will have this poster for our own cause it means we're better.

There are some practical benefits to one massively besting the other in sales, mainly in the form of more dev attention, more exclusives, and less wait time for patches and ports, but no amount of internet arguing is going to achieve that kind of dominance for either group, so it's mostly for it's own sake.

Thsi is pretty much what I was going to say. I have all the consoles and a good gaming pc. Doesn't mean I don't argue PC is best and PS3 >Xbox 360. It's just fun.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Because it's beyond a lot of people's budgets to have both a console and a PC that can play games effectively (particular if they normally use laptops for their non-game PC stuff). And whenever there's a situation where most people are forced into choosing one thing and then they get locked into that thing for a long time, then there's always a lot of heated discussion over which is better.

It's the same reason for the console wars. Sure you could technically buy both, but thats beyond what most people are willing/can pay for a device to play games

I'm on benefits, and still able to afford everything I want, even if i do have to wait a month or two to obtain it. Hell, I live in a flat, and have to pay bills, food ect.

I think it's just a case of people just being ignorant to all the choices they can have, and wanting to be in a special club. Which all they are doing is missing out on a huge selection of games.

I myself am currently on benefits and have had no trouble saving up with a tight budget (still paying rent,food etc) and with a lot of patience (something a lot of people on here would need if they are downplaying the use of saving up their money)and over time I've been able to save for both a 360+PS3 and their exclusives albeit not having a decent desktop until a month and a half ago thanks to saving two tax rebates.

I have to agree with them living in their special little bubble but they really need to use common sense, I mean heck the so called PC master race gab on about how PC gaming is cheaper and simple yet when a budget for saving has been made aware it suddenly doesn't make sense to them and thats a tad bit sad.

All in all it's really not that hard for saving up for the things you want since I've done it for 3 platforms and some smokes along the way and you've also achieved what you wanted by saving so I don't see any other reason why these people can't do the same unless of course they live on a non existent island with no currency or Africa where there's no internet or electricity.

 

[Vegosiux]

All in all it's really not that hard for saving up for the things you want since I've done it for 3 platforms and some smokes along the way and you've also achieved what you wanted by saving so I don't see any other reason why these people can't do the same unless of course they live on a non existent island with no currency or Africa where there's no internet or electricity.

Or, y'know, Spain, Greece, Portugal...

"I've done it, so everyone can" while accusing people of "living in a bubble"...hoo boy...

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

I like my games paced a bit slower, to explore every nook and cranny, to mess around and generally have a good time, and aim for 100% completions in the end. I like to replay the good games, to me it isn't "play and forget". For example, my average Mass Effect 1+2 playthrough was 120 hours combined, taking ONE Shepard from start of ME1 to end of ME2. And I didn't really have much trouble with failing on any section, that didn't eat up my time; and I played that three times.

There are not enough hours in a day to do that with every 'big' title on the market, much less mixing in all the good indies, even if I had all the money in the world and played games 24/7.

So yes, I'm limited in my gaming budget, limited to a mere 86400 seconds per day. Do I want to play everything? No, I don't, because on that limit, if I play everything, I won't be able to appreciate anything.

This is pretty much my response when people talk about how it's so much cheaper to buy games on Steam. I do take advantage of Steam when it's in my interest but otherwise it doesn't do me a whole lot of good to sit around and wait for huge sales on what I want so I can buy a shit ton of games. I'd rather buy a game I'm excited for new than wait a year or more for it to be $2 on Steam. I don't have time to play that many games and the ones I do play, I thoroughly enjoy for a month or more so in terms of money spent and games played, it all adds up the same except more of my time is spent on games I love and not crappy titles that seemed like a good idea at the time

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Because some people can't afford both. Do I want a gaming PC or, do I want a new console? Do I have enough time to invest in both if I can afford to purchase from both? If I chose consoles, which of the several do I go with? I would love to play games from Steam and GoG but I can't really afford a PC that can run all of the games that I would want when I really need to save on a car that won't sputter and die on me.

 

[Nexxis]

If people were allowed to have both then there wouldn't be anything to fight over, and we can't have that. Who wants to be able to enjoy what they like without such drama, anyway?

 

[DragonStorm247]

If you can afford it, then sure. I think a lot of the debate comes from people who really do have to pick one (or at least find it hard to financially justify getting more). That's not to say gamers are poor, but money is a valid concern for most people.

 

[Signa]

I used to do both because both were different but equal. These days it's better and best.

To be fair, my SNES has been competing for time with my PC because of how bad things are these days. New games, regardless of platform, hold little sway over me.

 

[Jack Joe Tip Toe]

Because some people can't afford both. Do I want a gaming PC or, do I want a new console? Do I have enough time to invest in both if I can afford to purchase from both? If I chose consoles, which of the several do I go with? I would love to play games from Steam and GoG but I can't really afford a PC that can run all of the games that I would want when I really need to save on a car that won't sputter and die on me.

I do understand people who can't afford to have both. But I'm talking about the people who love to think that their console or PC is just flawless. If you can't afford both I understand and this post isn't directed toward you. This is to the "PC MASTER RACE" and console fans who are too blind to see the flaws in their platform.

 

[Something Amyss]

Because console wars.

Because some people think "it's technologically better" is a legitimate argument.

Because some people feel insecure about their purchasing decisions when they see they see other people who hold the opposite opinions that they have.

Because some people think other people are just irresponsible with their cash, and must be stupid because they could do everything on a budget so everyone else must be able to do the exact same thing.

Because some men just want to watch the world burn.

Most of the time, it's the bolded one.

To be honest, I'm seeing less and less of a reason to buy a console. With controller support and more standardised archetcture, with consoles now requiring updates and patches and installs, I can't see the justification. I put less money into upgrading my computer than I would into an Xbone, and even once I upgrade my processor and get a BD RW drive, I'm pretty sure I'll be under the budget of an Xbone, if barely.

At the same time, I'm not going to actively look own on anyone who doesn't see it my way. I fish around in the guts of electronics as a matter of my occupation, and I don't honestly expect people to have that practice. I remember when I first replaced parts on my earliest PC, and it seemed sooooo daunting. I understand the virtues of "plug and play," but feel there's less of it these days from consoles.

In short, I do get why people have preferences, but don't get why they need to be dicks about it and such.

Captcha: Glazed Donut....

Mmmmmmm....

 

[Something Amyss]

I do understand people who can't afford to have both. But I'm talking about the people who love to think that their console or PC is just flawless. If you can't afford both I understand and this post isn't directed toward you. This is to the "PC MASTER RACE" and console fans who are too blind to see the flaws in their platform.

Usually, the two are intertwined. people who can't afford or don't want to buy multiple platforms will come up with a sort of "sour grapes" attitude.

 

[OpticalJunction]

Sure having both is better than either one, but who has that kind of money?

 

[BrotherRool]

I do understand people who can't afford to have both. But I'm talking about the people who love to think that their console or PC is just flawless. If you can't afford both I understand and this post isn't directed toward you. This is to the "PC MASTER RACE" and console fans who are too blind to see the flaws in their platform.

The thing is whenever there's a situation where people have two things and they have to choose one and be locked into one, it always ends up being overly heated and irrational because they'll view it as an important decision and create a lot of discussion about which one is better. Because people are locked in they always want to believe their one is better because a)they chose it and want to believe they're intelligent and b) it's horrible feeling if you're locked into the inferior product.

Hence PC vs Mac, iPhone vs Android, PC vs Console and Console vs Computer. Cambridge vs Oxford. etc


I think the trick is realising that a hard choice actually means the choice is unimportant. It means both options are so good that you're struggling to differentiate them and you'll get a good experience either way. The correct answer to 360 vs PS3 was basically, it doesn't matter both will be great and give you almost identical services (which incidentally, if nothing happens will be the answer to PS4 vs One). And you're right, recognising that both are good is the correct option, but people's brains are wired to stress out about a choice when given the chance and look for the 'right' one and that's what leads to all this silliness.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

Because people with small cocks will always want to try to prove themselves 'better' than others with anything other than skill...

PCs are fine, it's their players that are the problem. Bunch of cheating silver spoon motherfuckers who think that a FPS being easier to control on a mouse and keyboard makes it better rather than worse. Challenge is nothing it seems

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

All in all it's really not that hard for saving up for the things you want since I've done it for 3 platforms and some smokes along the way and you've also achieved what you wanted by saving so I don't see any other reason why these people can't do the same unless of course they live on a non existent island with no currency or Africa where there's no internet or electricity.

Or, y'know, Spain, Greece, Portugal...

"I've done it, so everyone can" while accusing people of "living in a bubble"...hoo boy...

Strange I don't see Greece, Span and Portugal becoming the new Africa...

hoo boy for not caring because I've seen far worse on this forum than what I said above.

 

[Vegosiux]

Strange I don't see Greece, Span and Portugal becoming the new Africa...

Which is exactly my point, kind of. Checked the youth unemployment rates in those countries lately, and the measures they had to comply with to get the "troika" assistance? Life in those countries sucks these days, but hey, they're not in Africa, so who cares about the fact that this economic crisis and people struggling with their monthly budgets might be closer to home than you think.

For all the crankiness I see Brits having in regard to that government and country, all I can say is that you have no clue how good you have it at this point. There's a proverb in my country: If your ass is full, you'll find it easy to indiscriminately shit on people less fortunate than you. (Which by the way, includes the "Well those people shouldn't be gaming at all then" sentiment)

hoo boy for not caring because I've seen far worse on this forum than what I said above.

Irrelevant. You're going from one extreme into the other. Yes, it sucks that children are starving in Africa but frankly, I don't give a damn about that.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Strange I don't see Greece, Span and Portugal becoming the new Africa...

Which is exactly my point, kind of. Checked the youth unemployment rates in those countries lately, and the measures they had to comply with to get the "troika" assistance? Life in those countries sucks these days, but hey, they're not in Africa, so who cares about the fact that this economic crisis and people struggling with their monthly budgets might be closer to home than you think.

For all the crankiness I see Brits having in regard to that government and country, all I can say is that you have no clue how good you have it at this point.

hoo boy for not caring because I've seen far worse on this forum than what I said above.

Irrelevant. You're going from one extreme into the other. Yes, it sucks that children are starving in Africa but frankly, I don't give a damn about that.

I'd say I have it a little bit good but not as great as my friends per say so I do have a rough clue.

But I'm also noticing at this point in the conversation that "can we have both" isn't possible and that we must devolve into mud slinging from one platform to the other or can't we make a change or middle ground so we don't have to mud sling all the time because I'd really love to know.