I post in the GTA thread prompted me to think about this, as it's sorta sneaked up on me, and was interested to hear how others view this.

Let's start with a bit of history, I am an "old" gamer, I remember first playing games like Chequered flag, and horace goes sking on the Spectrum 48k way back in the 80's, and have pretty much played games ever since, I have had personal computers (C64, speccy etc) up till the sega master system, where I then went onto consoles because they offered "arcade realistic" gaming, and at the time I was spending FAR to much money on Super mario brothers and Wonderboy in the arcades.

I migrated to a Megadrive, and had pretty much every console known to man, Atari lynx, Jaguar, N64, Gamecube to name but a few,but remained PC-less up untill I brought my first PC in the early to mid 90's.

At that time, the internet had started to get into it's stride, multiplayer gaming online was becoming a viable proposition, and PC gaming was seen as "grown up", where as consoles had gotten a reputation of being childrens toys, so PC gaming seemed the natural progression.

After many years of PC gaming, following the normal upgrade cycle that is neccesary, and spending far too much money to run the latest and greatest game, I remember getting my first Voodoo addon graphics card to run something or other!!!, I decided to stop upgrading about 5-6 years ago.

Because of this, I did start to become limited in what I played, because whatever I would want to play would look rubbish because I didn't have an nvidia carlos-fandago X9990 pro mega graphics card.

I pretty much fell out of the "general" gaming scene, and stuck to playing mainly racing sims on the PC, under last year when I managed to score a free xbox360 as part of my mobile phone contract.

I was frankly amazed at how far console gaming had become, the community spirit, the online capability etc etc, and am now back into gaming, and my PC now only gets used for LFS.

So how do consoles stack up against PC gaming for others on here?, if it weren't for "hardcore" racing /flight sims (even though I get a LOT of enjoyment out of Forza 2 and GT5p), but if it weren't for that, or I could find the same thing on consoles, I doubt I would even use it for that.

Is it just a "cycle"?, will PC's "overtake" consoles again?, or are PC's and the continual upgrade cycle just too expensive to compete with the current generation of consoles?

What does console gaming offer over PC gaming for you, and vice versa?.

One comment about PC's were to "extra" things a PC will do, and thats fair enough, but these days, PC's / laptops are almost disposable items, you can pick up a half decent PC / laptop that can do the "extras" but not games for less than £300, where as back in the day, even a modest PC was upwards of £1000, also, most homes have already got a PC that will do the "extras" but not game, so why spend money on a new PC, or upgrading an exsiting one when you could by a console for less?

Consoles now also do some of the "extras", you can watch movies, play music, browse the internet etc etc.

To me, console gaming offers ease of use, no longer to you have to worry about game x not working, or reducing the graphics level to get it running at 30fps, no longer do I have to worry about benchmarks, endless tweaking and performance tuning, I just buy a game, stick it in the console, and away you go, you know you are going to get the same graphics / sound as your mate/reviews.

Also, a feature the PC used to have over consoles was patches and downloadable content, ok, so consoles still don't have the community addons, Fallout 3 springs to mind, but no longer do you have to live with a game if it needs patching, they can now offer patches.

I also enjoy HD gaming, on a large screen LCD TV, sitting on my leather recliner in a warm lounge, rather than being shut away in the back bedroom on a computer chair.

So for me, consoles is where gaming is "at" for now, and if LFS requires any investment in hardware in the near future for me, I will probably walk away.

My favourite aspect of PC gaming is the ability to mod and tweak games, be it something as simple as changing a bmp to alter a texture, or going as far as a proper Total Conversion with entirely new maps, characters, story, and AI routines.

Hardware-wise, I like the much better and crisper resolutions you get from playing on a monitor, and I really love being able to switch components about. Yes its a lot more expensive, but I liken it to people who build customised cars - yes, you can buy a second hand Fiesta for £300, but you won't get nearly as much enjoyment from it as putting together a kit-car yourself, even though that costs 10 times as much. I also just don't really like sitting on a sofa to play games, but I can appreciate that it's a bit of an odd stand to take and that I'm in a minority in that aspect.

Lastly, I will never be able to use a pad over a mouse & keyboard. There are situations where a pad works, but aiming in first-person is not one of them.

I've been a hardcore pc gamer for years now and whilst I have a ps3 I still find myself clamouring for a good pc game. I find most console games to be, how do I put this...very amaturish and water down for the mainstream gamers, compare Crysis to Farcry 2 and you'll see where I'm coming from. FPS on a console is just WRONG and you've got that bastard overrated freak halo convincing devs that it does.

consoles have thier place and you cant beat getting a few mates around for chinese and beer, but if your a enthusiastic hardcore gamer then the PC really is the only format to be playing on.

besides the winning arguement is LFS is on pc.

I use 1080p on the consoles, (1920x1080), on the PC I use 1650 x 1080

Quote from Gunsmith :

I find most console games to be, how do I put this...very amaturish and water down for the mainstream gamers, compare Crysis to Farcry 2 and you'll see where I'm coming from.
besides the winning arguement is LFS is on pc.

Most releases, i.e. Fallout 3, GTA 4 are the same across the board.

Yes, but most people don't.

Also, although I've not tried it, I've read about consoles struggling to keep a playable frame-rate at those resolutions.

Quote from danowat :

Most releases, i.e. Fallout 3, GTA 4 are the same across the board.

yes and i applaud devs who make multi format games that complement the hardware they are on. what really pisses me off is when i load a pc game and all the options are designed for a 360 pad/i need to sign into games for windows fail and the interface is all wrong. I was going to mention deadspace as been an example of getting it wrong but delayed input from the mouse could be argued that it works in favour of the gameplay as it wouldnt feel the same if you were playing it like you would 3rd person quake.

there was a game not too long ago that was a 3rd person shooter set in the arctic (forgot the name) but that was a classic example of getting it wrong.

i take my gaming seriously so i get pissed off with poor games a lot more then ordinary people. farcry 2 made me almost feed my dog the DVD but then i love my dog enough not to poison him with what is clearly consolified shite.

Ooh, you've opened a horrible can of worms bringing up this argument. Fanboys from both sides will be all over it in a second

At the moment PC gaming is experiencing a bit of a problem. New hardware is really expensive and new games all need it. Once that development slows down, the prices drop and people can afford to get new graphics cards, it'll pick up again. For example, the GeForce 9 series was out for about 10 minutes before the GX2s came along, making them a bit pointless.

Developers use screenshots to sell their games, and especially to build up hype before launch. So obviously they want to make it look as good as possible, and to do that they get it working on the top-end equipment. Great for them, not so great for anyone who doesn't have a spare £400 for a new card. Sadly there seems to be enough rich people around to keep the sales up or they'd need to rethink their backward-compatibility issues.

On the other hand, consoles have one hardware config (ignoring hard drive size). You know that out of the box your shiny new console WILL give you the graphics the reviews are showing. You know that if the developers can get it looking one way, that's exactly how you're going to see it at your end. They say "frame rate fixed at 60fps", that's what you'll get. From brand new to the end of it's life, you know that every Xbox and Playstation across the world is showing the same stuff.
No frame-rate disadvantages, no turning off grass to expose snipers (BF2, I'm looking at you), no waiting for that one guy with a crap machine to finish loading the level (Dawn of War).

On top of that, hacking consoles for gaming advantages is pretty rare. Glitching, sure, but no aimbots or wallhacks or anything like that.

The advantage the PC has is controls. For RTS and FPS, nothing beats mouse and keyboard. For sims, nothing beats a wheel. But of course control systems for the consoles are improving as well, and the PS3 supports a whole load of PC peripherals.

It's a balancing act. In terms of hardware power, consoles are always going to be behind. The 360 and PS3 are now 2 years old. That's 2 years of missed updates to graphics cards, and while they're still able to output impressive-looking stuff, it's never going to compare to a top-end PC.
But in terms of being easy and not requiring any thought about what you need to upgrade next, consoles take the point. Everything's there, built in and ready to go.

Now cue the "ZOMG teh consoal r sux wiv crapy hardwarez" and "ROFL peecee luvers use teh haxxx!111one" fanboys.

Quote from Dajmin :

snip

I like that post, it's very similar to how I feel about the whole situation.

Quote from Dajmin :

For example, the GeForce 9 series was out for about 10 minutes before the GX2s came along, making them a bit pointless.

oh god dont get me started on the "fabled 9-series" but you are absolutly correct, each format has its place.

I think these days there aren't enough "must-have" games coming out to justify the cost of a gaming PC. Given that your hardware will be "current" for 12-18 months, how many games will come out in that period that you really care about playing? For me, it's one or two.

But I don't see consoles as an alternative, because again there just aren't enough games that I'm interested in. So I'd either have a PC that can play games - because I've got to have a PC anyway - or I'd simply not play games.

I think next time I'm in the market for a new computer I'll take the latter option and buy a ****ing Mac.

The choice is fairly simple, but is dependent on your "domestic landscape".

If you have kids, buy a console. If you have kids and go the PC route, the kids won't be able to play when you're working. If you have more than one kid, you'd need to buy a PC each due to the lack of portability (laptops are not for gaming, just say no). Once you've bought each kid a PC, you've become tech support and that's no fun at all.

Consoles are better when kids are involved. They're programmatically more robust than PCs, they perform better, they're cripplingly expensive to buy games for which makes your kids feel loved (bizarre but true in my experience) and most importantly, they're the only thing going in this modern era to actually keep some family cohesion - the console is bolted to the TV in the livingroom and, as long as you don't buy them each a TV and a console for their bedrooms, the kids do all their fighting in one spot and the only thing at risk of bodily harm is the (deliberately cheap) coffee table in the centre of the room (aka damage limitation). The kids learn how (not to) share and they might even learn to play together.

If you're a bachelor, you can consider other criteria.

Oh yes, I forgot that PC games are, for the most part, about half the price.

Another advantage of the PS3 this generation - region-free means us Euros can buy them at the dollar price

Quote from Crashgate3 :

Oh yes, I forgot that PC games are, for the most part, about half the price.

and even cheaper if you know what your doing but this isnt the place to discuss that.

Crashgate3 you seem to strike me as another avid pc gamer, what are your thoughts on Epic megagames?

Quote from Gunsmith :

this isnt the place to discuss that.

Hell no. This is the official forum for a game. You can work out the rest regarding discussion tolerance.

The main thing I look for in games is longevity (racing sims are excellent in this) and for that reason most console and even most pc titles leaves me cold. I tried PS2 a year ago but after just maybe 20 hours of play time it was sitting most of the week unused. I just can't get myself excited about console games. Plus the games are more expensive, usually there is no demo and I simply don't trust game reviews because sometimes a game that scored 75 was more fun than a game that scored 95.

It's also a bit cumbersome with consoles as I have wired everything though my computer. Movies, music and games, even tv. For that reason my computer is always on so there is no waiting it to boot up, like I have to wait with consoles. And maybe one of the biggest reasons for me not having any consoles (apart from my old PSX) is that none of my friends are gamers. Maybe I'd have a wii or something to play with small groups but for that I'd need to invest more into a console than I'm confortable with.

But then again, consoles certainly have their strong points, bug free game experience and installation are certainly nice and being able to buy a game without making sure it doesn't come with tons of bloatware is certainly something I miss with pc games. I hate that every time I want to install something I have to spend 5-10 minutes surfing in the web making sure there isn't some adware or other trouble inside the .exe. But those are just small annoyances. I just don't see getting my moneys worth with a console tbh

to this day i still regard Crysis as one of the pinnicles of modern gaming, despite its steep requirements its just so replayable, i keep finding ne and amusing ways of killing people, just lastnight i killed someone by maximum strengh'ing a can of tuna at the back of thier head.

brillaint.

oh and detonating chickens with C4 is just awesome

Quote from Gunsmith :

there was a game not too long ago that was a 3rd person shooter set in the arctic (forgot the name) but that was a classic example of getting it wrong.

Lost Planet?

I do feel that often PC games devs get "lazy" knowing they can blame poor performance on hardware rather than their own sloppy coding (Crysis, anyone?).

I have a console (admittedly an old Xbox running XBMC) but frankly the sort of games you get on the console don't interest me, and when I DO want to play an FPS (i.e. BF2) I really don't like console controls (even if it just because i'm used to keyboard / mouse...)

Quote from Jakg :

Lost Planet?

thats the one! was on the tip of my tongue. as for crysis's sloppy coding, did you know that theres more code in making the trees break apart then there is in all of farcry? i dont think its about sloppy coding, more of theres so much of it to process.

That's a good point. The defined hardware of a console means the developers have to do more code optimisation (though it's a far cry from the 80s and early 90s when programs we'd buy on DVD now used to fit on one or two 1.44MB floppies). PC developers are, generally, pretty lazy, and that can't help the market in the long term.

Quote from tristancliffe :

That's a good point. The defined hardware of a console means the developers have to do more code optimisation (though it's a far cry from the 80s and early 90s when programs we'd buy on DVD now used to fit on one or two 1.44MB floppies). PC developers are, generally, pretty lazy, and that can't help the market in the long term.

It's the ongoing argument.

Devs - Piracy is killing PC gaming.
The Public - No, crap games are.

Quote from Jakg :

I have a console (admittedly an old Xbox running XBMC) but frankly the sort of games you get on the console don't interest me, and when I DO want to play an FPS (i.e. BF2) I really don't like console controls (even if it just because i'm used to keyboard / mouse...)

Apart from hardcore sims, what games are missing from the current generation consoles?.

As for the cost of games, depending on where you buy from the differential is much less than half price.

Quote from Bean0 :

It's the ongoing argument.

Devs - Piracy is killing PC gaming.
The Public - No, crap games are.

Honestly the only game I've been really, really glad I played in the last couple of years was Portal. That game just shat all over everything and showed that with a bit of imagination the medium can be brilliant. But games like that come along once every few years, because studios don't have the nuts to fund projects like that. So it seems we're doomed (no pun intended) to suffer endless cookie-cutter FPS games for the rest of eternity.

Quote from danowat :

Apart from hardcore sims, what games are missing from the current generation consoles?.

As for the cost of games, depending on where you buy from the differential is much less than half price.

Imo the sims2 is

Quote from Gunsmith :

thats the one! was on the tip of my tongue. as for crysis's sloppy coding, did you know that theres more code in making the trees break apart then there is in all of farcry? i dont think its about sloppy coding, more of theres so much of it to process.

Ok not neccessarily Crysis (imo it wasn't that great, even on all-high, but meh), but I do remember lots of games that were "system breaking" which looked crap because they were just badly coded...

The sort of games I like (SupCom, LFS etc) aren't really on consoles, and as it is when I do play games (which, atm is rare apart from the odd-bit of BF2 with the UKCT guys - and a few CR Dutchies) I like to be able to do it with TS in the background, which pretty much rules out a console anyway.