[Little Writer]

If "Heavy Rain" came to PC, I'd have to buy a new one to be able to run it anyway, which would cost me more than a PS3, so if I was going to buy anything, I'd know what to choose.

[MoP]

Personally, in that situation I'd get the PC anyway, since it's much more versatile and useful, not just a gaming machine.

I'd echo DrFrankensteins and Erwin_Brs sentiments. No irrational 'hate', resentment or whatever towards 'consoles', it's just that getting one (or more) doesn't make sense to me for the reasons they gave.

[Little Writer]

I completely agree, if you actually take advantage of its versatility and usefulness, which I don't think I would.

When talking about gaming only, the console remains my choice. If I buy a new PC today, there's no guarantee it will be able to run future releases. That depends on the hardware requirements, over which you have no control. You might be able to alter your system and use all kinds of patches or emulators or whatever, but that doesn't guarantee anything either, while it does require knowledge of how that stuff works.

You don't need to know how a PS3 works internally in order to play its games.

Simply putting any PS3 game disc into a PS3 console and start playing immediately will always be easier than having to check the game requirements and see if your graphics card is supported, your processor is fast enough, your amount of memory is adequate, etc. because console games are specifically designed to be able to run on said console, while there's such a variety in PC systems you simply can't expect a company to make sure it runs on everything. That's just technically impossible, ánd it would hinder technological progress. At least with consoles, manufacturers can spend time on developing a new system, and their customers can switch to this next-gen result according to their own schedule and budget.

I understand there are many people out there for whom this is no problem. I applaud and even envy their knowledge and perseverance in these matters. For me, it's a personal decision based on wants, needs, but also possibilities, which makes the comparison of console and PC somewhat redundant in my view. I respect everyone's choice in the matter, as I would expect my own to be respected as well.

Apart from what I said above, I don't have a real preference when it comes to platform. I bought a new PC last year and I've had a lot of fun catching up on games first released for the PS3. I like playing on the PC, because I don't have to stop if someone wants to watch TV, and yes, I agree graphics look far better. And there are a bunch of games I still plan to play on PC. Yet when it comes to security of actually being able to play, I also plan to buy a new console.

Everything has its good and bad points, and how you weigh them against each other is everyone's own business.

[misslilo]

How about backwards compatibility on the consoles?

I mean, in a few years from now, will we be able to play PS1 games unless we have a PS1 or 2?

At least for the PC we know people behind DosBox and ScummVM and the likes work to get the old dos and windows games to play.

[Little Writer]

Yes, it's a similar issue. Part of the reason why I haven't yet bought a PS3, is because you can't run PS2 games on it.

[DrFrankenstein]

It is not in the business model of console manufacturers to support backwards compatibility. You see, they will do anything to make you buy the latest console and the latest games. They don't have any interest in you playing your old favorites instead. Ironically, it's the PC platform where you can play your PS2 legacy games (look at PCSX2).

[HaroldO]

Originally Posted by DrFrankenstein

It is not in the business model of console manufacturers to support backwards compatibility. You see, they will do anything to make you buy the latest console and the latest games. They don't have any interest in you playing your old favorites instead. Ironically, it's the PC platform where you can play your PS2 legacy games (look at PCSX2).

That's not true. All consoles this generation and the DS handheld have some level of backwards compatibility. The PS3 plays PS1 games and earlier models in some region have a form of BC. The Xbox 360 supports a list of some xbox games and the wii have almost full GameCube BC. Sure it's not perfect in most cases but it is in their business model.

I'd love to get a PS3 with full BC, I'd even pay a bit more for it if it was available. But since I have a PS2 that's not much of an issue.

[TimovieMan]

Pardon the *bump*.

I’m not gonna talk bad about consoles, but personally I prefer PC-gaming. Mainly because the genre of games I play can only be found on PC. Point-and-click adventures, RPGs, turn-based strategy and sports management games don’t do so well on consoles.
The only exception are adventure games and the DS system. Those are a good match (and therefore I own a DS, and several adventure games for it).

But regarding consoles : I just don’t see the point in buying a certain console if I’m only ever going to play one or two games on it. The only game on the Xbox 360 that’s ever gotten my attention was Rockstar Games presents: Table Tennis, and the only PS3 game that’s sparked my interest was Heavy Rain. Getting a console for just one game is way too costly, imo.
I would have loved to play Table Tennis, and I just know that Heavy Rain could become an all-time favourite of mine, but I’m simply not going to play them unless they get released for PC. Even though I find that extremely annoying, it doesn’t mean I now “hate consoles”.

The things I do have a gripe with, are lousy ports.
I have a godawful DS-version of Myst that’s been gathering dust since the first day I bought it (that thing was just unplayably bad).
And EA Sports has pissed me off twice this year with shoddy portwork.
Once when they released Tiger Woods: the Masters (their first PC golf game since 2007), which apparently wasn’t even remotely like the PS3/Xbox version, but more of an update of EA’s Tiger Woods Online game from last year. A slap in the face of PC gamers, imo, who were expecting a decent port. It definitely made me glad I didn’t buy the game when it was just released.
And a second time with FIFA 12. Apparently, that game runs perfectly on PS3/Xbox, but the PC version is a bad port. The game itself is awesome, and possibly their best work since FIFA ’99. But it crashes like every five minutes and occasionally just starts to stutter (and doesn’t stop that until you restart).

Bad ports are a bigger problem than console exclusives, imo. They prove the developers were just in it for the quick and easy bucks instead of thinking of the gamers…

Just my two cents...

[Monolith]

lol the only game that got your attention on the 360 was table tennis. Your idea of excitement is so.....interesting. Its fascinating that anyone would say that is the only excitement they can find on a console.

[TimovieMan]

Originally Posted by Monolith

lol the only game that got your attention on the 360 was table tennis. Your idea of excitement is so.....interesting. Its fascinating that anyone would say that is the only excitement they can find on a console.

Played table tennis IRL for several years, and I like tennis games and other Pong variants, so yeah...

[TiAgUh]

Yeah! How DARE you not get excited for such poetic games like Halo3 and Gears of War3!?
Like Drogba said: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkhQZNHcxmE

[TimovieMan]

Originally Posted by TiAgUh

such poetic games like Halo3 and Gears of War3!?

How do you like "*yawn*" as an answer?

[Oscar]

s

Originally Posted by Little Writer

If I buy a new PC today, there's no guarantee it will be able to run future releases. That depends on the hardware requirements, over which you have no control.

As long as you buy reasonably new or at least current parts you can be pretty sure it will run games for 3 or 4 years on medium graphics, and 5 or more on lower graphics, which is about the lifespan of a console, isn't it? Upgrading a console from Xbox to xbox360 is just like buying new video card and cpu for your PC.

[jamiehavok]

Originally Posted by Oscar

s

As long as you buy reasonably new or at least current parts you can be pretty sure it will run games for 3 or 4 years on medium graphics, and 5 or more on lower graphics, which is about the lifespan of a console, isn't it? Upgrading a console from Xbox to xbox360 is just like buying new video card and cpu for your PC.

True, especially in the last 5 years or so as game development has seriously slowed down while pc hardware gets better and better as most games are written for ancient consoles. I mean look at crysis - pc exclusive 2007, best looking game ever and still was up until a few weeks ago when the pc version of battlefield 3 came out, and even after 4 years that's still barely a step up.
I built my pc 3 years ago and it still steamrolls through every game out there on maximum graphics settings. (ok i've had 1 gfx card upgrade, but even the last one would still run most stuff on max)

I can plug my xbox controller into my pc and my pc into my tv if a game is better suited to a controller and i want to sit on my couch and still have the advantage of way better graphics on pc, even the console ports look way better, - win, win. You just need to know what to buy, which you can easily find out with a bit of google research.

[TimovieMan]

Originally Posted by jamiehavok

I built my pc 3 years ago and it still steamrolls through every game out there on maximum graphics settings.

I second this.
With a high-end PC (without going into the insanely expensive category), you're set for a few years more than you were 10 years ago...

[adipocere]

I think PC gamers are console companies worst nightmare. Why? Because they cannot make money selling PC's and online subscriptions and all of that. And while console games are very easy to pirate, the level of computer literacy of console gamers tends to be lower then that of PC gamers, meaning less concerns about software piracy. Besides, console's have cornered the market for FPS, which like any genera has a pretty specific market.
If you go into any game store, you will see that they are all basically owned by the same companies and virtually all of their selection are games for console, with only a few of the major ones for PC.
If one of the console companies can get an exclusive license for a popular game, they never will have to worry about it going to PC and maybe they can sell a few more consoles.
There are what,three companies that make consoles? It sets tech (and creative) limitations for the quality of games, monopolizes the game industry, and muscles out independent competition.
A lot of people just find that console games pale in comparison to PC games. I've yet to find a single console game at it's best that is as immersive as even a mediocre PC game. I have all the consoles...collecting dust in my living room. I guess they are good for watching movies on.
So what if you miss a few good games that come out on console. Here is a hint: emulators. Besides, independent games are really gaining ground and there are a ton of awesome PC games and more and more coming out.