Source
r/gaming•
kittyfiddler

I think we can all agree, consoles are a much more efficient gaming platform than PC's ever were. Amiright?

Lets look at some facts..

360/PS3 have ancient GPU's that by today's PC standards are pretty shitty. Yet there's still only 1 Game on the PC that looks better than Uncharted 2. Isn't that strange my fellow gamers, the PC is this huge graphics powerhouse yet most of its games still look shittier than some of its console counterparts. Not to mention the fact consoles are much, much cheaper. You could never buy a good gaming PC for $300, hell, you could barely buy a PC at all for that, let alone ones that can max out games like Modern warfare 2 at 60 FPS on a full 1080p TV.

Its time to face facts PCgamers, computers weren't meant to game. Sure they do it well with the right hardware, but consoles are pedigree gaming machines, gaming is what they were built for, its their number 1 purpose in life. PC's have many purposes, and this is why they will never be as good as consoles for gaming.

Thank you for your time r/gaming. Its been a pleasure.

Posted Mar 30, 2010, 1:40 AM UTC · edited

049
tylerdurden03•

Turns out by playing games, I'm not interested in gaming efficiency, I'm interested in game playability.

There are some games that just flat out play better on PC (RTS and FPS to name a few). The only advantage consoles have is price point. But then again, PC's are used for much, much more than just gaming.

Also another benefit to gaming on PC is that I don't have to listen to 11 year old boys like you tell me to go fuck myself.

5
randominate•

This right here. The maturity factor alone is enough to stick with PC.

2
[deleted]•

Yeah except for the fact that it's bullshit. The majority of r/gaming is made up of PC gamers and most of you aren't mature at all. Just say you play games on PC because you like to, you don't have to keep lying to yourself to have a valid reason to play on PC.

1
randominate•

Yeah, except your point is bullshit because the people that post on Reddit aren't an accurate representation of the "the people" that play PC games. It's not like I can talk to a pedophile that plays XBOX and then assume that all XBOX players love buggering little children right? That would be completely baseless and ignorant on my part, right? Do you know why I never said "based on Reddit posts, console gamers are immature?" Because that argument would be too retarded to attempt and I'd instantly have a bunch of people on my ass telling me I'm stupid, similar to what I'm doing here for you.

FYI, I play PC games because I like being able to fire up MW2 without listening to some jackass talk about rape, sucking dick, or fucking someones mom. I do, however, have to listen to idiots that crank up 80's music into their mics (at least, until I mute them) - so I guess it's all par for the course.

1
[deleted]•

That would be completely baseless and ignorant on my part, right?

But that's exactly what you did. You claimed that PC gamers were more mature than people on consoles. You have nothing to back up this claim besides your feelings about it.

You may not think the PC gamers here are an accurate representation, but they do represent PC gaming nonetheless. Even if you think they're just a small minority. I seriously doubt they act immature here on reddit, and then they're all polite and proper when gaming. I've undoubtedly have heard the word faggot or nigger more times in PC games than I ever have on xbox live.

So does that mean I can now claim that consoles gamers are more mature? Because that's exactly what you did. You made a baseless assumption. That's why I said it's better to just say you prefer gaming on a PC and just leave it at that.

1
_Spy_•

FPS is not better on PC. This is a common misconception by people who don't have much experience with a controller.

Besides, on consoles we don't have to deal with punkbuster or serial keys or constant crashing or bad instability shit. Because consoles run on the same hardware, and developers hate us less.

1
[deleted]•

Hey do those $300 PS3/360's now come with 1080p TVs?

3
kekspernikai•

PCgaymers

Aw, c'mon. Not necessary, man.

2
kittyfiddlerOP•

It was an unfortunate typo, I swear. Anyways, I fixed it.

1
MsgGodzilla•

Troll.

2
kittyfiddlerOP•

If by troll you mean completely right, then yes, I am.

-8
Manicaeks•

If I could hook up a mouse and keyboard to the console, I'd be all for it

2
[deleted]•

On the other hand you can hook any controller you want up to a PC.

2
qxcvr•

Meh... I like having just 1 machine... I use it for movies, games, as a TV, etc. Yes a basic console costs $300 but it won't let me play HL2 on steam while watching a movie from netflix at the same time while talking to my mom half way across the country on skype and downloading porn. I guess that's why consoles suck... all they do is display a game on a TV. Oh... and I hate controllers. keyboard and mouse for me!

2
_Spy_•

Pretty sure you're not going to be playing HL2 while watching a movie. Unless you're badass.

1
qxcvr•

Oh.... I am THAT badass... No kidding. I put a movie on on one monitor and then play HL2 on the other... Amazing.

1
[deleted]•

That's stupid. You're either going to not pay attention to most of the movie, or you're not going to make much progress in the game.

1
wamsachel•

PCgaymers,

Troll much?

2
[deleted]•

or it could be the fragmentation that hinders PC games.

since the publishers and developers want to maximize profits and port their game to all the consoles they have to conduct the graphics as such. Not to mention that graphics and realism are extremely costly and the range of PC architecture/hardware configurations is endless so in order to move a decent amount of games they need to meet a comfortable middle ground.

TL;DR no, and the gaymer comment just hi-lites you as a rabid fanboy, congrats.

2
BacteriaEP•

Wow... I'm going to spare you from the flames you are sure to get soon. But I will "correct" a few of your points:

  1. The reason why many PC games that release today have graphics that are equivalent to the consoles is because gaming companies make them that way. Consoles sell more games, therefor games are optimized for them not the PC. I guarantee you the things you could do with top of the line PCs today would blow your freaking mind.

  2. Yes, you can build a decent gaming computer for between $300-$350. I don't feel like digging up the specs (for the millionth time on various forums), but head on over to newegg.com and see for yourself. Provided you're not getting the most state-of-the-art gear, you'd be surprised that building a dedent PC is not that expensive.

  3. Maxing out Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 2 on a PC at 720p (what a console would run at, maybe a little less?) is not difficult for a PC. Maxing it out at 1900x1200, however, might be a bit more difficult.

I'll agree with you that game consoles are more efficient at gaming, but there are certain advantages held by the PC that can never be matched by a console. Its the same example as a Mac vs. PC, or iPhone vs. Android. The former gives you security in a closed environment that is safe and easy to use. The latter is more open and allows for more customization that allows you to truly make the device your own.

1
JohnoTheFoolish•

My TV reports that my PS3 is outputting full 1080p.

1
BacteriaEP•

Yes but most games do not. In fact I'd be surprised if any actually did. In fact Modern Warfare 2 actually renders at sub 600p on the PS3.

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/5535.html

2
[deleted]•

LOL BUT MY TV IS BIGGER THAN UR COMPUTUR THAT MEANS MORE PIXELS. GUY AT WALMART SAID IT WAS HD.

PLUS I HAVE A COUCH AND FRIENDZ

1
BacteriaEP•

I'm going to do us both a favor and take this as sarcasm.

2
JohnoTheFoolish•

Looking at the splash menus and playing around with the browser a bit, I'm fairly certain that it is capable of outputting 1080 but I'm not that surprised that games are rendering lower.

1
[deleted]•

OK then, find me a console gamer who's playing in stereoscopic 3D.

Nothin'? Alright, back to killing zombies on my PC then I guess.

3D zombies.

1
kittyfiddlerOP•

I can wait another 5 or 10 years until they find a better way to 3D. Until then, it's just a gimmick.

1
[deleted]•

Ah, right then. Let me just go back and un-enjoy myself. Can't believe I fell for their gimmick. I'm so much happier now that you've told me how unhappy I am with it.

0
[deleted]•

Way to read too much into what he said. He wasn't talking about your feelings on 3D gaming, he was talking about his. Narcissistic much?

1
[deleted]•

Clearly I know how he feels, but saying that it's a gimmick is stating a fact.

It's just a gimmick - fact. I don't like stereoscopic 3D - opinion.

1
randominate•

You can even do it on three screens (and soon, SIX!)

0
[deleted]•

You cant find one screenshot of a better looking game on a console that is also on PC. Not one. They all have to be "dumbed down" for consoles. I tried playing GTA4 on xbox360, looked fucking terrible, blocky shit everywhere, no textures. Pc>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>whatever you got that aint a pc

1
kittyfiddlerOP•

All pc vs. console shit aside, do you actually like GTA IV for the PC? I've heard nothing but bad things about it.

1
[deleted]•

Meh, it looks amazing but is a huge resource hog, I liked San Andreas much better(I havent tried it with multiplayer but the game runs very stable, it just sucks down resource with no limits).

1
_Spy_•

GTAIV sucks.

1
[deleted]•

It would be a lot better without all the console shit they're trying to force on us. I bought it for PC and didn't play past the first level when it asked me to fucking SIGN IN TO SAVE. They even went with the whole X-Box dashboard 'look and feel' for their Windows Live crap.

0
CussCuss•

troll, but consoles run at shitty resolutions on shitty TV's with blurring and smoothing to make them look better.

1
kittyfiddlerOP•

I agree, anything running at 480p on a CRT television is going to look horrible. I think the wii's graphics are a good example of this. I don't use a shitty tv though.

0
CussCuss•

most TV's sacrifice resolution and quality for size compared to a computer monitor. We also went backwards in terms of quality when switching from CRT to LCD just for the sake of a thinner screen.

1
[deleted]•

Even if your TV DID match the resolution of my monitor (so, nothing below 1080p), you're left with a whole 50 games to play. Meanwhile, all my games run at precisely the resolution I ask them to. Plus, since the PC is a nice, open platform, my old games are occasionally updated by fans with even better textures. See: HL2, Half Life: Black Mesa, Diablo 2 high res pack, even goddamn Duke Nukem 3D texture packs.

Edit: That link is hella old apparently. Still, most big-name titles look better on PC than on a TV through sheer pixel count: http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/5535.html

0
cpt_bongwater•

Um actually pretty much every game that runs on a pc and consoles looks better on a pc

1
_Spy_•

OP is a troll. Still right, though.

1
sub_o•

I prefer console to PC, mainly because the sheer number of japanese games there. PC is still not a popular medium for Japanese game developer =(

1
Genocidicbunny•

So lets see what 300$ gets you with a console. Uhhm, a console. Games? Nope. Accessories? Nope. TV? Hah, yeah right.

Figure in the cost of your fancy 1080p TV, since you need it to game. (Oh sure, you can go with a cheaper 32" 720p, but we wouldnt want to give up quality) and your console experience now costs 1400$. Oh lookie, I got my gaming rig for a bit under that. Guess what I can also do on that? I can watch movies, I can surf the internet. I can program, I can do my homework. List goes on. What can you do on your console? Play games.

I can build a PC that can play most of the games available on the 360 and Windows for around 500$. 700$ if you wanna throw in a decent case. At the same time, that pc is much more usable.

The reason your MW2 maxes out at 60fps on a console is because on a pc it would be running at the equivalent of low settings.

EDIT -- I also forgot to mention that in the first revisions, consoles were often sold at a slight to moderate loss. I remember something about the PS3 costing like 600$ to make, which is comparable to your basic pc. Considering how little else it can do besides play games...

0
m1989•

Why is there this "war" between consolefags and pcfags? Consoles are obviously more efficient and convenient. PCs are more future proof, and more powerful (sometimes). They both have their points, neither platform is a bad way to game. ITS ABOUT THE GAIMZ!

-1
_Spy_•

I thought consoles were the futureproof ones. They're still developing games for the PS2

1