First off youre seeing a split out and merged thread. Some comments are gone. Also Josh came into a thread about the new video card that came out this week and posted "Do PC gamers actually enjoy having to purchase a new video card every year?". His posting in the past has earned him at least one suspention. He is absolutely hypersensitve to any critisizm of anything he is a fan of. If somebody came into a Gamecube hardware thread and said made an off topic smart remark he would still be in Feedback 12 hours later posting about it. (see Oh My God They Unstuck My Sticky in feedback for reference).

Secondly, me, Trigger, Jack, and Aghama are also console gamers. Josh is offering up an opinion on something he doesnt even do.

edit - I dont know nothing about spaceman spliff but I would like to say his opinions do not refect the opinions of most gamers I know. Pc gamers are not responsible for the content of any of these messages, spaceman spliff remains solely responsible for the content of his messages. All rights reserved. You cannot quote me without my express written consent.

Spainlinx - It's true - I game on both consoles and PCs. Since my favorite game genres are more or less exclusive to PCs, that's what I'm more interested in. I have been really happy with my Xbox and I picked up a $50 Dreamcast and a heap of games, but have probably only logged about 15-20 hours total on it since I bought it just before Christmas last year. The Xbox and my roommate's PS2 have gotten the most attention, but I don't find the gameplay all that compelling compared to games I play on the PC. That's just me and I've said that all along. I've maintained that some people will prefer consoles and others will prefer PCs for their gaming and that it mostly depends on the games they prefer to play. Josh has been making outrageous statements about PC gaming when he really knows nothing about it... keeping up on PC gaming by reading blurbs in EGM isn't the same as actually playing games. That's fine though - he likes different types of games, so PC gaming for him doesn't make sense. I never said I was trying to convert anyone. My statements have all been an effort to defend PC gaming and the gamers against Josh's rediculous statements. You don't have to believe that PCs are lightyears ahead of consoles, but it's true anyway. I could tell you were a console gamer before I got to the end of your post. They've been saying that consoles are catching up to PCs since forever... I have some old school video games magazines from back when the Atari 2600 was king and they were saying the same thing. They'll never catch up because PCs evolve on a daily basis and consoles only have their stages of evolution every 5 years. Consoles are designed using the latest in hardware technology and then tested and built and whatever and finally when they come to market, the PC is already beyond that in terms of graphics and sound and speed. Anyway - I didn't want to get dragged back into the argument, but I thought I'd address your comments a little.

I guess PC gaming seems too complex for some people who like it simple (no, I won't say J6P) what with all the upgrading and installing and patching (I hardly ever have to install a patch by the way and normally when I do it's because I want the new features the patch adds)... consoles work better for them. Hell, until the Playstation came out and they started releasing a few mature titles, console gaming was mainly for children. Looking at games magazines, all the console related magazines have fan art by 12 year olds and the letters to the editors are from teens and pre-teens and the magazines just seem juvenile to me. PCXL and PC Gamer seem to have a different and older crowd. I really miss PCXL. Plus - going by my experiences at E3, I'd have to say that the Nintendo crowd is a much gassier bunch than the PC crowd. It smelled like a port-a-potty in that booth. Sorry - what was my point? Oh - I don't know, I guess I think we should instead of seeing each other as console people or PC people, we should just see each other as people. All this gamism seems to be a step backwards in our social evolution.

Realistically they're not really.. On a pure hardware analysis alone the xbox is still more powerful than a lot of people's desktop machines. Then you've got windows running on top of that. To top it off you've got game companies coding for the bottom end of the market so that you'll almost never have your PC utilised to it's full advantage (it makes sense, they want to sell more copies). Sure you can bump the resolution up to 1600x1200 and turn on a few extra fx, but it's not the same as having a game optimised for your platform. One example of this was an interview I read with one of the level designers for SoF2. Part of it was basically a bitch fest over how he had to tone down his levels because raven required them to be playable on a PII400..

Well the Atari had sound before PCs did .

I don't find it too complex, just a complete pain in the ass. Sure I can download my patches, update windows, swap my ram chips, install beta drivers, but do I really want to just to play a game? Of course I keep getting drawn back for various games, but screaming and kicking.. And paying to beta test PC games hasn't never been a favourite past time of mine.

Obviously you're speaking for your own personal situation there, but I would bet there are many out there who aren't having it as sweet as you. And some of us do know how to use our PCs...

I think you lost it towards the end there .

Whatever the arguments, I am playing Neverwinter Nights right now and getting graphical glitches that would never find their way into any console release. The reason? Because Bioware didn't test their game on MY config.

Chris

Some valid points there... most PC games are indeed designed for the minimus systemus requirementus. At least. Ever play a game with those minimum system requirements though? Looks like crap and plays like molasses. Still - I hear what you're saying. As for patches and updates and whatnot - It's not like you get a new game and it doesn't work out of the box and you have to update this or that with patches and swapping ram (wha??) if you're the type who plays alot of games. I don't have to update or patch anything for Dark Forces 2 or Medal of Honor or whatever else because the latest direct x was installed on my PC back when I installed Wolfenstein (or whatever, these are just examples) and I've had the latest detonator drivers for my video card since I installed Giants. If I ever have a little glitch, it's pretty easy to upgrade my video card drivers or update directX which 9 times out of 10 will cure that problem and keep me away from problems for the next 6 months or so. You consolers make it sound like you gotta patch every stupid game and patch windows and patch yourself before you can play. It's not that complicated. Maybe if you only play a new PC game once every year or whatever, I can see how that might happen and why your impression might be that way. It's just not for me I guess cuz I play so many games. The latest problem I had was GTA3, but it was a common problem (since I had common hardware) and they had me download and install a Windows XP patch that fixed it. It took all of 2 minutes. Big whoop. Then again - the PC version of GTA3 is crappy. It looks pretty, but this port doesn't seem like they worked on it much to get it right for the PC. Strange since the title started on the PC. I wished they had worked harder - it just doesn't flow quite right... I can't put my finger on it.

Also - good point about OS being something that slows down a PCs performance. Still - My PC is faster and better and more powerful than my Xbox even taking into account OS. I understand that most people's aren't. I also know that pitting a PC versus the Xbox with similar system specs (~700mhz ~GeForce2/3 etc...), the Xbox would pull ahead since it doesn't have the OS getting in the way as much.

My first two loves were the C64 and the 2600. I have been a split gamer from day one, and a Nintendo fanboy for 16 years. PC's and consoles simply cater to different types of games; FPS's, flight sims, and strategy games belong on the PC. And if none of those genres interest you, then you're a pretty selective gamer anyway and a $200 console is all you should own.

Bugs in PC games suck, but they can and almost always are fixed. If you're that concerned about them, wait a few months after the release of a game to buy it. For me, the flexibility allowed with mods and what not more than make up for any necessary patching. Sure you will be able to download add-on's for console games in the future, but most of the great mods are developed by the user community, a phenomenon we're not going to see on the consoles.

Trigger, as always you are wrong about what constitutes a kiddy game. You are totally showing your bias against Nintendo. People of all ages played the 2600. There were 30 year old, normal people in arcades back in the early 80's. Adults didn't suddenly begin playing video games when the PSX came out. There's a huge difference between games being "for kids" and being for all ages. If all of Nintendo's big games are ignoring the post-pubescent gamer, then why do many of them have some of the hardest gameplay around (do you have any idea how difficult it was to get all 120 stars in Mario 64?) And what does mature get us? The Xbox developers seem to think that mature means bouncing tits and fart jokes. If that's hardcore to you, more power to you, but to me it's just obnoxious and insulting. I hope this phase passes, but until then I'll be getting my shine on and taking on the Mother Brain.

Hypocrite.

I'm not hypersensitive. If someone bashes the gamecube or PS2, a movie a like, a band, etc., I just state my opinion and debate the issue -- just like you, Trigger and the other PC gamers have done in these threads.

That's basically the point of discussion.

Aghama, well said on the "kiddy" games.

Youre entitled to you opinion of me. It just seems my opinion on you is more widely held than yours of mine.

You and trigger where arguing with my comments on PC gaming. I do the same when someone bashes something I like.

So you're comment was hypocritical. It isn't an opinion, it's a fact.

As always I'm wrong? Dude, whatever... You're just upset cuz you know it's true. I said that gaming was mainly for children until the PS1 came out with some more mature titles which brought more older gamers into it (or back into it)... I wasn't going back to the Atari 2600 and I never mentioned Nintendo and you are just taking an opportunity to defend Nintendo (which we aren't even friggin talking about) and blast Xbox (which I don't follow you around the forum, but I'll bet you've done that before). I maybe said once that Nintendo makes kiddy games that don't interest me... so what? I don't like little cutesy characters that squeak and squeal like babies and blow rainbow sprinkles all over the place. I also have always hated the Nintendo controllers - they have all been uncomfortable to me. You want to think there's something wrong with me cuz I prefer to tear someone apart with a gun and see their guts flying everywhere rather than play pokemon versus mario in a fighting game - then fine, but keep it to yourself. I was talking about how consoles are marketed more towards children than adults based on the magazines about them. That's not saying that adults don't play these consoles. Sheesh - you pull this Nintendo smear campaign out of your butt or something? All I said about Nintendo was that they farted alot at E3. Adults can fart too. To be fair - everyone at E3 farted alot... Every 10 feet I'd smell someone's stinky fart cloud. I was getting pissed and wanted to start pummeling people. These are all people over 18 years old who should know better than to fart in crowds.

As for what constitutes a kiddy game (I don't remember saying what does or doesn't before), I'd say it's games about Thomas the Tank Engine or Tonka or Rainbow Brite or Pokemon or whatever else little kids glom on to. It's also games that are rated E for everyone - those games are for everyone including adults, but if it's a game suitable for a child then it's a child's game. Who cares? If you like playing games that are made for children, who gives a crap? Do you feel like less of a man playing Mario Sunshine or something? I played the Britney Spears game which is probably made for 11-14 year old girls who like Britney Spears - does that make me a 14 year old girl? No. Get over the whole Nintendo kiddy thing. I don't friggin like Nintendo for multiple reasons - I have played a bunch of games from every console they've put out and I think they market more to children and I've just never been interested in their games or their characters or their consoles or whatever. That's me. I don't think that if you play on a Nintendo that you're some sort of kweer or a baby or child or whatever. You just like different games than me. The hell? I'm not allowed to say what I feel about a console? I'm not slamming Nintendo, I'm just explaining why I don't like it. I'm fully aware of Resident Evil and whatever... Anyway - this thread is about PC versus Console relating to graphics. How off topic are we now? I thought we were supposed to be arguing the same side anyway - et too aghama? et too?

I agree about the kiddy games. For example, my most-loathed game of the year, Eternal Darkness, was lauded for being one of the most "mature" games out, because of its storyline. However, the gameplay was ridiculously easy and simplistic. It didn't matter that Resident Evil had a stupid story, it was still scary because the monsters could actually kill you. There is never that kind of tension in Eternal Darkness.

I hope the challenge in Mario Sunshine is not watered down.

Youre punny. GET SHINE!!!

I just want to point out that I don't think a game is good because it's more mature... plenty of mature games suck. I also enjoy plenty of "kiddy" games - Sonic, Cel Damage, Stupid Invaders, etc... I also don't think that just because there is blood and violence that the game is mature... I like games like Civilization and Railroad Tycoon etc... and I consider these to be more mature titles. Nintendo makes more games that are for all ages - I don't like the gameplay of Nintendo games, I don't like the controllers they have and I'm not really swept in by cartoon characters that make cutesy noises. That's just me as I've said. I don't think anyone who likes these games are children. I think I'm being misunderstood or else the Nintendo crowd is just being hyper-sensitive. I abstain from saying "Fanboy" and I don't go into Gamecube threads unless it's about a game I'm interested in.

The PC is my least favorite platform. But pointing out your threadcrap is defending something I like. Youre Radiculos!!! Then you start a thread "To Appease" me. Fine.

Whatever, time to edit the ignore user list again. Perhaps you should do the same.

Let's keep it calm, and keep it on topic. This thread is about video issues on PCs vs. consoles. Discuss.

Looks like someone could use a time-out... maybe a nap.

Ahh... remember when we used to get to take naps on the floor in school? Between eating paste and play-dough, that was my favorite time of the school-day.

Sorry about jumping the gun, I didn't see that both sides were being very insulting from what I read, but I do have to defend myself and say that I am a PC gamer as well, just not as much lately. I logged countless Diablo 2 hours so don't think I'm saying PC games suck. I would probably buy every FPS for the PC if I could hook up the Xbox Type-S controller to my PC, or if someone makes one exactly like it, because I prefer the dual analog sticks to mouse and keyboard. I know maybe it's more inaccurate, but I enjoy the game more with a controller. Anyone have a recommendation for me?

Thrustmaster makes a few controllers for the PC that have analog sticks. One of theirs looks kinda like an Xbox controller. Gravis has a good one too.

I saw a PC controller in Wal-mart that was layed out exactly like a Dual Shock controller as well. But I didn't look at the name or who it was by.

There's lots of controllers that look like PS2 controllers... there will be Xbox clones eventually.

Look at it this way...

Nintend 100$
Snes 150$
Nintend 64 200$


Now the consoles start at around 300$... pc's arent' the only thing going up in prices, consoles are too. Besides, pc's are much better just because you can do so much more with them.

My last video card is an ATI 8500LE which I paid 75$ and it should still be good for a couple of years.

PCs are coming down in price... they have been for a long time. I spent about 1900 bucks on my PC and it was a real stretch to spend that much. My Packard Bell from 1994 cost about 3000 bucks and was a piece of budget crap.

As for PC prices, you do realize you don't need the top of the line video card to play the latest things, just stay somewhere in the general area. once a newer card comes out, simply upgrade by buying someone else's who is upgrading to the next level.

this way you stay in the range of updated quality.

Well, Blade let the smack down in the other thread (I guess on me mostly cuz I'm such an agitator ) so let's try to keep this thread from getting snapped.