Page 1 of 2
What medium do you prefer playing computer/video games on?

Posted:
Sat Mar 26, 2005 11:19 am
by Kipple
What medium do you prefer playing computer/video games on?

Posted:
Sat Mar 26, 2005 7:20 pm
by THX1138
xbox here. i hate the idea of playing games on a PC because all the different hardware variables affects gameplay and graphics, wheras a game station (such as xbox) has no hardware requirements other than to have the console and a controller.

Posted:
Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:48 pm
by Gene Ettix
PS2 here. THX1138 pretty much said it all for me.
I'd probabaly say Xbox if I had one... and PC if I could afford to customize my own... hmmm... let's say... AlienWare gaming system


Posted:
Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:03 am
by BR796164
PC all the way!
I must say I am a console hater. I think games for consoles are always rather primitive. Old school gamer, ya know, started on good ole Atari 800, gone through Amiga era without affection right to 286es.
Don't take me seriously.


Posted:
Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:00 am
by Deckard BR26354
For games, it has to be consoles - developing for a 'fixed' spec is the best way to ensure that the all the end users have the same quality product. This is especially important with online games. In the PC world, you can get an advantage in online games by simply having a faster machine. How can that be fair?
Just wait until until the PS3 comes out with it's 'cell' chip - Microsoft are so scared that they're launching Xbox2 this year, so as not to be seen as 'competing' directly with it...

Posted:
Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:39 pm
by THX1138
xbox2 will be using the G5 mac architechture, so im not worried about the PS3
i wonder how that's going to work out. games made for xbox2 will be easily ported to the mac G5, so maybe the macs will become the next gaming os (OSX, rather). since many people claim (yet, still untrue) that macs suck for games because there's nothing avalible for it. maybe xbox2 will change this, and make macs more dominant for gaming.

Posted:
Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:53 pm
by br_collector
To top thing's off Nintendo are going to be releasing a new Game Cube to compete with Microsoft and Sony, I don't think it will be as good as the Xbox2 and PS3 but after looking at the trailer for the new Zelda game (due this year) who knows?
I voted Game Cube because I think Nintendo have the best gaming characters out there Zelda, Mario, Donkey Kong, Sonic now... And most of the games arn't always about killing and violence but stratergy and role play.

Posted:
Fri Apr 01, 2005 8:01 am
by Deckard BR26354
THX1138 wrote:...maybe xbox2 will change this, and make macs more dominant for gaming.
Or make Micro$oft more dominant in the Mac market...

Posted:
Fri Apr 01, 2005 1:22 pm
by THX1138
Deckard BR26354 wrote:THX1138 wrote:...maybe xbox2 will change this, and make macs more dominant for gaming.
Or make Micro$oft more dominant in the Mac market...
i was also about to comment on this as well, but i'd rather not think about it.

Posted:
Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:55 am
by I.love.Clovis
PC

Posted:
Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:56 pm
by Carbon Copy
It all depends on what you have and what you have used.
Playing the first BR game from Westwood along with Thief, Half-life, Dune, Diablo etc was ok on PC back then.
Then I started playing on consoles like x-box, PS2 etc. and found it easier to deal with since I did not have to worry about upgrades and other perphericals just to accomodate the game as much at the time.
I may try playing on PC again and compare it to the consoles and see which is better. Too bad there no really well known hybrid PC/high powered console out there yet but I could be wrong.

Posted:
Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:26 am
by Patryk Wawer
Ofcource nothing will beat the huge variety of games for the PC.
It's the most expensive way of playing games since every 2-3 years you shall spend at least 1200 dollar (without monitor) for a new system that can run smoothly the new wave of games.
Most pc games can be played online or with network.
If games are buggy and devs support it you can get fix patches.
Graphics are always better, all load times are ten times faster.
With emulators you can run console games on your Pc.
Games are cheaper, but that's becuase you pay so much for your system.
The variety of genres is huge and lot of indies create fine games for.
PC is the way!


Posted:
Mon Jul 18, 2005 4:40 pm
by THX1138
actually, console games right now have the same capabilities as pc...and more.
you have bug fixes via xbox live (if you have xbox). network play, you can start clans, have an online community. if you want periphials (spelling?) like joysticks, there's always games that can use those (steel batallion, for example) as for graphics, it all varies. pc may be better...but just wait for xbox 360 and PS3. i'd like to see pc vendors top those graphics while remaining inexpensive.
and by inexpensive, i mean lok at gfx cards fro computers. $125+ for a decent card. ram? if you want a good system, youll need more ram, thats about $50. thats about $175 right there, thats enough for an xbox, and all that is assuming you have a pc to start off with.

Posted:
Tue Jul 19, 2005 2:44 am
by Patryk Wawer
Yes that's exatly what i said.
Pc is far way expensive then console, but it beats them all in all aspects.
(xbox live, cool but you have to pay for this along with your internet connection.)
but just wait for xbox 360 and PS3
everyone does say this.
But the PC is making his steps to go beyond these consoles. They will stay in the far back.
Besides that, you can't get mods for console games.

Posted:
Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:24 pm
by THX1138
Patryk Wawer wrote:Besides that, you can't get mods for console games.
actually, you can mod console games. i cant remember which one it was, but there was an xbox game modded (need a mod chip though). you transfer the game to the xbox hard disk via a networked computer or a friends xbox.
also, the ps3 was designed to run linux with a hard drive, and most people are speculating sony's reason for this was to make for better modded games. but so far, thats just speculation.