Why do console gamers settle for so little?

[Ben7]

mmm I remember my old 8800GT, fantastic card.

Seriously though you can get a pretty decent gaming Pc from around £600-700, even cheaper if you make it yourself.

And its not like your gonna be sending it in constantly for repairs/upgrades.

I got my current pc for around £900, used it for the last 3 years and only upgraded it once, only becouse my 8800GT fried out, then again I had won a nice GTx so that wasn't really expensive.

 

[MrTub]

i don't have thousands of dollars to shell out for a gaming computer

And why would you need thousands of dollars? It doesn't even cost a thousand dollars to assemble a gaming PC.

to pay for the graphics card, upkeep, and all the games n shit

it doesn't cost that much, you sir are a troll.

How exactly are they a troll? A good gaming PC that can run Crysis maxed costs about $1800.00. I should know a computer store by our grocery store is selling one for that.

Once again THAT IS BULLSHIT. I can play crysis maxed with about 35 fps WITH A COMPUTER THAT COSTED $1000. So please shut up.

 

[JoshGod]

well ps3 has 32 vs 32 and that game is a year old and with mag 256 players (apparantly no lag ill be impressed if true)
i feel your quarel is abit more with MW2 and i agree it can be very laggy i got 2 games in a row where the same host was chosen but was awful!! it feels like it was rushed out to fit the 2 year period sigh. once i got reconnected to a diff host 3 times within 1 min it was rediculous.

but overall we settle for so little because its easier and its not so little.

 

[Kinghoza]

I hardly play my xbox anymore, its always so laggy for me :s
Though it wasn't always like this.

 

[TheFacelessOne]

I honestly don't see what the whole fuss is about. I have very litte, scratch that, nothing to complain about Modern Warfare 2's system. Compared to my experience with Call of Duty 4, there is no change except for the new server finding feature and the occasional server switch.

Both of are not a big deal to me, as I have no problem with the first one, and the second rarely happens to me and it's not a big deal when it does.

 

[Bat Vader]

It's necessary to insult them when they say dumb shit and still act like they know it all.

The same could be said of someone who uses a PC. If you are going to insult a console gamer insult the person not all the console gamers.

 

[Bat Vader]

i don't have thousands of dollars to shell out for a gaming computer

And why would you need thousands of dollars? It doesn't even cost a thousand dollars to assemble a gaming PC.

to pay for the graphics card, upkeep, and all the games n shit

it doesn't cost that much, you sir are a troll.

How exactly are they a troll? A good gaming PC that can run Crysis maxed costs about $1800.00. I should know a computer store by our grocery store is selling one for that.

Once again THAT IS BULLSHIT. I can play crysis maxed with about 35 fps WITH A COMPUTER THAT COSTED $1000. So please shut up.

It is bull they are charging a gaming PC for $1800.00? Considering they are a small computer store they have to turn a profit somehow besides fixing computers.

And no, I won't shut up. Saying please and then shut up will most likely get a bad reaction from someone. I on the other hand am more polite than to tell people to shut up. If you don't want to argue than just don't respond back. Don't tell people to shut up. It just makes you seem immature.

 

[Misterian]

I'm a console gamer.

wanna know why?

do you have any idea how much money it causes for the parts needed to get every good game that catches you eyes? you might need a faster processor for 1 game, a larger hard drive for the next.

for PC games, you find yourself not only buying a game, but either buying the needed parts to properly play one, or buying a stronger PC just to play one, all which cost hundreds or thousands more than the game itself.

as far as I'm concerned, PC gaming is a luxury, the kind you PC gaming richfolk can afford, I once estimated that anyone who can afford to do PC gaming is practically rich enough to at least buy caviar every once a month. Or if you'll let me exagerate, tPC gamers are the kind of people who drink milkshakes from silver straws and live off 4-star meal t-bone steaks or something.

I do console gaming mainly because getting the parts and components needed for all the games you want to play are sometimes more expensive than buying the game itself and frankly makes PC gaming hardly worth all the expense in my opinion.

But also partly with PC gaming, even when you have all the parts needed, doing things like attaching certain parts somewhere, getting a game online, and even installing a game can get so confusing and frustrating that for some people like me, half the work is turning to a person you know who might know better at figuring out what the heck you're supposed to do next.

got me?

 

[Yersinia pestis]

Consoles are cheaper in that they don't require the nearly constant hardware updates that PCs do inorder to keep up with the graphics demand that comes with new games.

I drop ~300 dollars on a console and I don't have to spend anymore money than for the cost of the games. I don't have the cash for top of the line PCs, and consoles offer me the same games with outstanding graphics.

 

[YuheJi]

so you'll refute every honest word of mine as just being an attempt to "troll?" pfft. such things are below me.

truth is, i don't really know how much it costs, but i know i can't afford it seeing as i've already purchased a 360 with XBL and i'm sixteen working part time.

if you dont know then why not GOOGLE? what makes it worse is that you exaggerate to the point of blasphemy. gaming PCs are 400-600$ items, not thousands of dollars.

maybe someone less tired could do it for me.

Luckily enough, someone already has.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.105715
Gives you the parts to put together, and links to newegg.com to order those parts.

The thread has turned into PC vs. consoles like usual, so I'll give my usual 2 cents. Most people have a computer already. Assuming that the computer was bought in the past five years or so, all it takes is a graphics card purchase (like a shiny new 8800 GT for about $100), and possibly a little bit more ram (1 gig or so, leading to around $30) and you can play the vast majority of current gen games, though likely not at max setting.

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

So, with the Modern Warfare 2 thing showing that PC gamers are going to be screwed over by A-titles from now on, or at least A-titles from Activison and Infinity Ward (that aren't WoW), us PC gamers have had the 'delight' of seeing what console gaming is like.

So, I have to ask, REALLY? You're content with this? A maximum of 9 vs 9, having the host be switched around left, right, and centre, having lag ampified because of the P2P connections...?

I mean, XBox live customers, you PAY for this stuff, so why is it that your service is worse than what the PC gamer IS getting 90% of the time? Why aren't you demanding a better service for your cash? Hell, why aren't 32 vs 32 games an option on XBox? Thats standard on PC.

I don't ask this to be 'elitist' like every other person on this website seems to think we PC gamers are, I'm asking because you're being given a poor service that you seem content with, even though there is a cheap, reliable fix for it (dedicated servers).

I mean, YOU are the ones who get to determine how good the service is you're paying for. PC gamers can't manage it anymore because we've been marginalized. So why aren't you demanding a better service? Especially on XBox Live where Microsoft don't have an excuse for not having them - i.e. you are paying a subscription charge for online play, so why don't they let some of that cash fund servers so you don't have to rely on laggy p2p networks?

i play on xbox live, and have a gaming rig. thats the best argument ive ever heard for dedi servers ever. i really dont know why we cant have more players. i hate kicking my friends out of my party, limited to 6 for hardcore TDM, when i have 17 or so on MW2. its really retarded. and theres a point, retardation. a lot of console players have it, ill admit it. kids especially. my friends talk about MAG and i say "i dont trust the 5 other guys on my CoD team, why would i trust 127 PS3tards?? it is sad though. but if you had console dedis, you would have little kids hosting games and booting players because they did better than them. ive heard it all from those little basterds, and its part of what makes me sad to sometime say i play on xbl. id like to have more people in MW2. i play with military guys, and we like to play all tactical and stuff (or at least try to, while wading waist deep in shit).

anyway though, i think most of our gold membership money is spent on making sure halo 3 and other first party M$ games run smooth, because most other games lag like crazy. even halo does. Us Xbox members are pretty much being whored. and its sad, because most of us know it, and were too invested to just drop it and buy a gaming rig, cuz pc is def the shit. dedi servers are sweet, idk if i would actually go on them on a console though.

mostly though i think its "hardware restrictions." which i feel is sitting in the seat next to "user friendly" and "vista" on the Microsoft Train Of Thought. but that is what ruiner has to say. so do i like paying for gold? its not as bad as you make it out to be. once i fix my connection, im the p2p host 90% of the time and the game runs smooth for everyone. MW2 fixes some host migration and lag issues, but ive still been drop kicked out of games. i feel its still a much better service than the PSN, and the saying always holds true,

YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

so you'll refute every honest word of mine as just being an attempt to "troll?" pfft. such things are below me.

truth is, i don't really know how much it costs, but i know i can't afford it seeing as i've already purchased a 360 with XBL and i'm sixteen working part time.

if you dont know then why not GOOGLE? what makes it worse is that you exaggerate to the point of blasphemy. gaming PCs are 400-600$ items, not thousands of dollars.

Show me a real gaming PC for $400-600, and ill show you Yahtzee's Triple-Cunted Hooker.

 

[ethaninja]

First a maximum of 9 vs 9? Look at Frontlines Fuel of War. 26 x 26 mp and still the game didn't reach popularity (even though it was a good game). MAG with its projected 256 mp matches and people have reservations. You are blaming MS or Sony for a choice the developers are making. For me Ithink 9 x 9 is enough. With Frontlines you formed an 8 man squad. So even with the other 40 people running around I feel like I am playing with 8. And since the maps were big enough I didn't find myself fighting against more than a few at any given time. Most matches there would be tons of people who I never even saw on the battlefield.

And sure I have had some laggy matches. The system isn't perfect. Although those matches were few and far between and usually involved someone from the UK. most games allow you to see if thier ping is up to snuff and allow you to choose whether you should look for another match.

From where I am sitting XBL is constantly improving. Can't ask for much more than that.

I'm installing Front Lines atm =D But yeah, I'm a PC gamer, but the multiplayer in MW2 I'm probably never going to play so I'm happy.

 

[KAPTAINmORGANnWo4life]

Well I refuse to pay for online, and don't have a PS3, so I couldn't care less. It did seem like the PC market was getting the shaft on Call of Duty 6 (which is a double shame because I played the story mode, and let's just say that I owe Halo an apology).

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

For me Ithink 9 x 9 is enough.

This is an opinion born from playing games built around the idea of small player sets. There have been plenty of PC games that demonstrate why larger player counts are a good thing.

The game Tribes for example often had maps where your base was several kilometers from the enemy (the shortest distance, found on the map blastside, was about 400m). On maps that span several square kilometers, you find that you desperately NEED a high player count to fill this space. This space was a basic requirement of the core game mechanic of the jetpack. Smaller spaces make the jetpack irrelevent, and thus the core gameplay difference (lots of motion on the z-axis) is lost.

In MW2, 9x9 is certainly enough for the map set that has been delivered. Such is the standard for console games however - games are generally designed around the idea of smaller maps and lower player counts, and while there is nothing inherently wrong with such an approach, it does limit the types of games that one can produce.

 

[Tears of Blood]

I'd love to have dedicated servers on XBL.

Not that I'd care terribly much. I play games for the single-player. I hardly ever play multiplayer games.