[Hannes]

Here's my problem;

I buy a laptop. It plays most of the newest games OK. A week later, the company I bought my lil toy from announces a brand new, faster and better version of the same laptop. People buy the new version, until a week later a new one arrives. And so on and so on.

I know that laptops aren't really meant for playing games. Newest ones can, sure, but PC's are way better for that purpose.

However, I feel like in the world of gaming, you will always end up disappointed. You can wait 4 months for the PERFECT machine, (that will play that game you've wanted) but when u get your hands on it, you've already heard about another, faster and better pc. And then you realize... Your pc doesn't play the upcoming game that you really wanted to try.

What do you guys think? Is it just easier (and cheaper) to switch to console gaming? At least that way, your machine will always play the games with full graphs with no probs. Or do you think the endless upgrading of your pc is fun?

[Periglo]

Originally Posted by Hannes

I buy a laptop.

Actually, I think a laptop for gaming makes sense, as you can play powerful games anywhere on a large(-ish) screen. Screens have improved a lot, and there are some gaming-oriented laptops even, such as Alienware.

A desktop PC, on the other hand, has it harder to compete aganist a console, gaming-wise. Still, you can still use a gaming PC for office, paperwork...

[booB]

Originally Posted by Hannes

Here's my problem;

I buy a laptop. It plays most of the newest games OK. A week later, the company I bought my lil toy from announces a brand new, faster and better version of the same laptop. People buy the new version, until a week later a new one arrives. And so on and so on.

I know that laptops aren't really meant for playing games. Newest ones can, sure, but PC's are way better for that purpose.

However, I feel like in the world of gaming, you will always end up disappointed. You can wait 4 months for the PERFECT machine, (that will play that game you've wanted) but when u get your hands on it, you've already heard about another, faster and better pc. And then you realize... Your pc doesn't play the upcoming game that you really wanted to try.

What do you guys think? Is it just easier (and cheaper) to switch to console gaming? At least that way, your machine will always play the games with full graphs with no probs. Or do you think the endless upgrading of your pc is fun?

I don't think you're thinking about this logically. How is having a PC and not upgrading it any different than having a console? Consoles are not upgradeable, either. Guaranteed, if you have a PC and you DO keep it upgraded, your games will run better than they will on a console. If you don't, you are no worse off than if you have a console. This is because consoles are made with whatever hardware is available when they are released, while PCs are made with whatever is available when you buy it. The technology is always improving. You don't HAVE to keep your computer state-of-the-art, but the option is there, and, yes, many of us enjoy having a high-end gaming rig. And it's not as difficult or expensive as it sounds; a good gaming computer costs about the same as a PS3, and a high-end gaming machine can be put together for less than what most console gamers spend on a single generation of consoles.

The only advantages of console gaming are: 1) the number of games released, and 2) the ability to easily play on your giant TV instead of a monitor. Most PC gamers would argue that 1) is irrelevant, because the vast majority of console-only games are crap, and 2) is going to become irrelevant shortly, as media PCs become more popular.

Then again, if you're buying a laptop for the express purpose of playing high-end games, then you are insane, and you've probably already answered your own question.

[Hannes]

^U should rly re-read what I posted. I didn't ask anything about laptops and high end games. I'm not an idiot, u know. lol. I was talking about new technology in general, using laptops as an example. IE bigger HDDs, blu ray players, HD screens, blue tooth etc. They keep upgrading them every week. I'm more than pleased with mine, actually, that's not the case. Just writing my thoughts in general because I noticed that the maker of my laptop announced a new line of laptops just a week after releasing this model. Thankfully, it has nothing that I'd personally want (FullHD screen, instead of HD ready, which with this resolution is very harsh on the eyes), but it got me wondering....

Compare the prices of getting a new console every 3-4 years, to upgrading ur PC every year, and you'll see what I mean. A new game comes out in the market like once a month. Your PC doesn't keep up with everything, so you need a new processor, then u need a new power supply, more memory etc.. And 6 months later, the same situation. At least with consoles u rly don't have to worry about things like that. You just buy the game and play it.

[booB]

Originally Posted by Hannes

^U should rly re-read what I posted. I didn't ask anything about laptops and high end games. I'm not an idiot, u know. lol. I was talking about new technology in general, using laptops as an example. IE bigger HDDs, blu ray players, HD screens, blue tooth etc. They keep upgrading them every week. I'm more than pleased with mine, actually, that's not the case. Just writing my thoughts in general because I noticed that the maker of my laptop announced a new line of laptops just a week after releasing this model. Thankfully, it has nothing that I'd personally want (FullHD screen, instead of HD ready, which with this resolution is very harsh on the eyes), but it got me wondering....

I read what you wrote just fine. I'm not an idiot, you know. It sounded like you were asking if you should stop playing games on PC and switch to consoles, because PCs need to be upgraded.

Compare the prices of getting a new console every 3-4 years, to upgrading ur PC every year, and you'll see what I mean. A new game comes out in the market like once a month. Your PC doesn't keep up with everything, so you need a new processor, then u need a new power supply, more memory etc.. And 6 months later, the same situation. At least with consoles u rly don't have to worry about things like that. You just buy the game and play it.

I haven't upgraded mine in over a year, and it handles the new games just fine. If I wanted to upgrade anything, it would be adding some RAM (about $30 for 4GB), or putting in a new video card ($150-$200), but this doesn't need to be done any more often than you would buy a new console. Some people do, but it's more for bragging rights than out of necessity.

And the new games coming out run better on a fully-upgraded PC than on a console. This was the point of what I was saying above. You don't buy new processors, RAM, etc., for your console, do you? And new games are coming out for it all the time. It's the same thing as the PC situation; if you use last year's PC to play a new game, it won't run as well as as it might on a brand new PC. The same is true of last year's console; the only difference is that the console can't get any better a year later.

In fact, consoles nowadays are basically just PCs that you can't upgrade. The difference is that games for consoles come pre-dumbed-down in order to run properly according to the console specs. If you're using a PC that can't handle a game at max settings, you have to dumb them down yourself (through the Options menu). This can't be done by the manufacturer, because every PC is different.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Stick with a desktop PC if you're going to use it almost exclusively for gaming. You can't continuously upgrade laptops (yet).

Originally Posted by booB

You don't HAVE to keep your computer state-of-the-art, but the option is there, and, yes, many of us enjoy having a high-end gaming rig. And it's not as difficult or expensive as it sounds; a good gaming computer costs about the same as a PS3, and a high-end gaming machine can be put together for less than what most console gamers spend on a single generation of consoles.

I've been out of the loop with the progress of PC hardware in the past 5 years since I've switched to console gaming almost exclusively. If it's possible to get a good gaming computer for the price of the a PS3, as you stated, what can $300 buy me? That's the current market price for a PS3, and that's what I paid for my console.

Would that $300 gaming computer come with a beefy enough graphics and sound card so that I don't need to upgrade at all for the next 5 years?

The only advantages of console gaming are: 1) the number of games released, and 2) the ability to easily play on your giant TV instead of a monitor.

Actually there are further advantages...

*Console exclusive games. XBL, for example, offers games by independent designers, many of them young talents fresh out of school. Some big releases have become console releases only, like the upcoming Alan Wake (though it may be ported to PC depending on console success).
*Online games like 1 vs. 100, where you're pitted against your friends and many other fellow gamers around the world. Cash prizes are offered.
*Netflix streaming service, a lot of which are HD quality.
*Social networking like Twitter, Facebook, and in-game voice/video chat without having to leave your couch.
*Upcoming advancements in gaming interface such as movement control - Natal for XBox and Move for PS3.

Basically the consoles aren't so much trying to replace the PC as they are further streamlining and improving themselves as venerable entertainment, information, and social networking hubs. It really depends on how you want to experience your gaming lifestyle.

Whereas the PC allows you freedom to tinker and screw around with hardware and games, many people around the world don't care for that or do not have the time and patience to poke around inside their PCs and would rather experience the games and have lots of fun.

Most PC gamers would argue that 1) is irrelevant, because the vast majority of console-only games are crap, and 2) is going to become irrelevant shortly, as media PCs become more popular.

That's merely a matter of opinion, don't you think? There is a widespread snobbery (i.e. resentment) within the PC gaming crowd over consoles. It wasn't as rampant before the current generation of consoles ignited the gaming world and introduced many otherwise non-gamers to video games, especially in that those non-gamers would never have gotten that chance if gaming stayed mostly on the PCs.

Then again, if you're buying a laptop for the express purpose of playing high-end games, then you are insane, and you've probably already answered your own question.

I'm waging that perhaps in the near future some laptops may become modular, allowing you to replace aging hardware (like graphics cards) with newer and more powerful hardware. But that may end up being a niche market anyway. Most people don't care for tinkering like that unless they're already experienced geeks who know their stuff.

[booB]

I didn't intend for this to be a console vs. PC debate... obviously, you prefer one, and I prefer the other. I was just speaking to the question of monetary value, and whether PC upgrading was worth it. I'm not going to bother replying to the "console is better!" arguments, except to say that the only actual ADVANTAGE to consoles is that you can easily use them with your TV (hence, your "without having to leave your couch" comment). Otherwise, a PC can do everything a console can do, and more.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I've been out of the loop with the progress of PC hardware in the past 5 years since I've switched to console gaming almost exclusively. If it's possible to get a good gaming computer for the price of the a PS3, as you stated, what can $300 buy me? That's the current market price for a PS3, and that's what I paid for my console.

Well, that $300 is for a console with out-of-date hardware. You could easily buy an out-of-date PC for that money, pre-built. I'm too lazy to check prices right now, but I know that I've spent considerably less over the past 6-7 years on my PC(s) than the average console gamer has spent on consoles, and I guarantee that I get better performance out of mine. Plus it's 100% backwards-compatible, all the way back to the 80's, and can play games from the first 3-4 console generations. Now THAT'S value.

Would that $300 gaming computer come with a beefy enough graphics and sound card so that I don't need to upgrade at all for the next 5 years?

Need, yes. I didn't upgrade mine for years before I bought my current one. But you'd probably want to, because the whole point of PC gaming is to get the best performance you can out of your games.

Basically the consoles aren't so much trying to replace the PC as they are further streamlining and improving themselves as venerable entertainment, information, and social networking hubs.

That's unfortunate. If consoles became upgradeable, they would completely replace PC gaming. As things stand, the console and game manufacturers don't want to do this, because it's cheaper and easier for them to cater to universal hardware configurations than to cater to evolving ones, even if they're better. And the games STILL cost more for consoles. Go figure.

Whereas the PC allows you freedom to tinker and screw around with hardware and games, many people around the world don't care for that or do not have the time and patience to poke around inside their PCs and would rather experience the games and have lots of fun.

PCs are getting easier and easier to upgrade every year. Hell, I put together my last PC myself, and I'm not exactly a hardware expert (although I am more knowledgeable than the layman). What I see happening in the near future is a resurgence in PC gaming, once media PCs get to the point where they're easy enough for the average person to set up and upgrade.

There is a widespread snobbery (i.e. resentment) within the PC gaming crowd over consoles.

I don't think this is true at all. There is DEFINITELY a widespread snobbery within the PC gaming crown, but it is against game developers giving us a raw deal. In many cases, they're too lazy to develop for PCs (especially action games), so they develop dumbed-down (and overpriced) games for consoles. They use the piracy argument (which has been debunked many times) to justify their actions. Extolling the virtues of PC gaming over console gaming is not snobbery, any more than extolling the virtues of driving a Lamborghini over driving a Chevrolet. I just think you see it as such, because you're driving the Chevrolet.

I'm waging that perhaps in the near future some laptops may become modular, allowing you to replace aging hardware (like graphics cards) with newer and more powerful hardware.

Maybe, but I see portable computing going the opposite direction -- ie, smaller and smaller devices, which are therefore less and less upgradeable. Consider the evolution thusly: laptops -> notebooks -> PDAs -> iPhones/iPads. Also, laptops generally have only integrated graphics cards, and you can't just swap them out. There will have to be some new sort of technology in order to do so, and I don't see it being worth it for PC manufacturers. Nobody buys laptops for their customizability; they're for portability. (Storage is a different story, of course, but that's because it makes sense to be able to easily swap out information from one laptop to another.)

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by booB

I didn't intend for this to be a console vs. PC debate... obviously, you prefer one, and I prefer the other. I was just speaking to the question of monetary value, and whether PC upgrading was worth it. I'm not going to bother replying to the "console is better!" arguments, except to say that the only actual ADVANTAGE to consoles is that you can easily use them with your TV (hence, your "without having to leave your couch" comment). Otherwise, a PC can do everything a console can do, and more.

I wasn't intending it to be a "console is better!" discussion, either. What I meant was that it depends on HOW you want to experience your gaming lifestyle. Some people love to tinker with their hardware to get the most out of gaming. Some people define getting the most out of gaming by doing away with tinkering and just popping in a game and getting on with it.

Well, that $300 is for a console with out-of-date hardware. You could easily buy an out-of-date PC for that money, pre-built. I'm too lazy to check prices right now, but I know that I've spent considerably less over the past 6-7 years on my PC(s) than the average console gamer has spent on consoles, and I guarantee that I get better performance out of mine. Plus it's 100% backwards-compatible, all the way back to the 80's, and can play games from the first 3-4 console generations. Now THAT'S value.

That's IF you are a PC geek and want to tinker. But a ton us gamers may not be interested in that at all. "a console with out-of-date hardware" is what we might want and we don't even care if it's "out-of-date" as long as we can just pop the disc in and jump into the game. And when the next generation of consoles come along, well, we'll just upgrade to those.

Need, yes. I didn't upgrade mine for years before I bought my current one. But you'd probably want to, because the whole point of PC gaming is to get the best performance you can out of your games.

I'm not interested in dealing with having to upgrade my PC. I stopped PC gaming years ago precisely because I can't stand the thought of having to screw around with hardware. I just wanted to game. That's my choice, just as it's your choice to stay a PC gamer. And that's been my point. Whatever makes us happy.

As a former PC gamer I know what I'm missing, and I don't miss it at all.

That's unfortunate. If consoles became upgradeable, they would completely replace PC gaming. As things stand, the console and game manufacturers don't want to do this, because it's cheaper and easier for them to cater to universal hardware configurations than to cater to evolving ones, even if they're better. And the games STILL cost more for consoles. Go figure.

That's how the business operates. Part of console gaming is having to pay for the convenience of not worrying whether a game will run on your rig. And part of PC gaming is getting to screw around with your PC's guts to be able run a new game. Pros and cons for each platform. Which do you choose? I chose mine and I'm happy with it.

PCs are getting easier and easier to upgrade every year. Hell, I put together my last PC myself, and I'm not exactly a hardware expert (although I am more knowledgeable than the layman). What I see happening in the near future is a resurgence in PC gaming, once media PCs get to the point where they're easy enough for the average person to set up and upgrade.

Again, you're looking at it only from the perspective of a PC gamer, i.e. someone who KNOWS how to tinker with computers and has the knowledge and experience to do it without ruining the hardware, right? I used to do that too, you know.

Then I got sick of it. I got sick of games not running well on my rig and trying to figure out why. All that time I was a poking around in there I could've been having great fun actually playing the game instead.

I don't think this is true at all. There is DEFINITELY a widespread snobbery within the PC gaming crown, but it is against game developers giving us a raw deal. In many cases, they're too lazy to develop for PCs (especially action games), so they develop dumbed-down (and overpriced) games for consoles. They use the piracy argument (which has been debunked many times) to justify their actions. Extolling the virtues of PC gaming over console gaming is not snobbery, any more than extolling the virtues of driving a Lamborghini over driving a Chevrolet. I just think you see it as such, because you're driving the Chevrolet.

You just proved my point, LOL!

I disagree that developers are "too lazy" to develop for PCs now and merely settle on "dumbed-down" games for consoles. That's a cheap shot, booB. I think one main reason why many devs make games more expressly for consoles is that that's where a large percentage of the money is TODAY. Game development is a highly expensive business and you want to get the most profit out of your investment, and the consoles are ubiquitous worldwide so more people are likely to get the game on that platform.

As for "dumbed-down"? No. Many games for consoles are very, very challenging in ways that are different from PC games. I think you're viewing it through the lens of a firm PC gamer.

Maybe, but I see portable computing going the opposite direction -- ie, smaller and smaller devices, which are therefore less and less upgradeable. Consider the evolution thusly: laptops -> notebooks -> PDAs -> iPhones/iPads. Also, laptops generally have only integrated graphics cards, and you can't just swap them out. There will have to be some new sort of technology in order to do so, and I don't see it being worth it for PC manufacturers. Nobody buys laptops for their customizability; they're for portability. (Storage is a different story, of course, but that's because it makes sense to be able to easily swap out information from one laptop to another.)

I know. That's why if modular consoles do become reality in the near future I suspect it'll just be a short trend or a niche market.

I'll again state my point. The bottom line is do you want to be a tinkerer and continuously upgrade your PC's guts to play newer games, or do you prefer to not have to worry about learning to be a tinkerer and instead just pop the game disc in and jump right into the game?

[Burns11]

Originally Posted by booB

I was just speaking to the question of monetary value, and whether PC upgrading was worth it.

I am of the opinion that, no, it is not. In the end I was paying a lot of money to play only a very small amount of games.

Originally Posted by booB

except to say that the only actual ADVANTAGE to consoles is that you can easily use them with your TV

Not true at all, the biggest advantage to consoles is that it's a closed system, meaning that not only can you do more with less technology, but you can do so with less technical issues and publishers make more money so that you end up with more games (and for the purposes of this discussion, I am going to use games in the sense of upper echelon products utilizing enough 3D processing power to necessitate a high performance GPU).

Originally Posted by booB

I'm too lazy to check prices right now, but I know that I've spent considerably less over the past 6-7 years on my PC(s) than the average console gamer has spent on consoles, and I guarantee that I get better performance out of mine.

Not a chance.

Originally Posted by booB

and can play games from the first 3-4 console generations. Now THAT'S value.

Theft is not value, in fact it's a bane on PC gaming.

Originally Posted by booB

What I see happening in the near future is a resurgence in PC gaming, once media PCs get to the point where they're easy enough for the average person to set up and upgrade.

That won't happen, PCs are going towards slower machines designed more as internet appliances than they are fast high end machines. I see the HTPC getting edged out more and more by the "net top" and TVs with built in internet ready capabilities. Not to mention that consoles are cannibalizing this market as well as they converge on all aspects of entertainment on the TV.

Originally Posted by booB

I don't think this is true at all. There is DEFINITELY a widespread snobbery within the PC gaming crown, but it is against game developers giving us a raw deal. In many cases, they're too lazy to develop for PCs (especially action games), so they develop dumbed-down (and overpriced) games for consoles. They use the piracy argument (which has been debunked many times) to justify their actions. Extolling the virtues of PC gaming over console gaming is not snobbery, any more than extolling the virtues of driving a Lamborghini over driving a Chevrolet. I just think you see it as such, because you're driving the Chevrolet.

You do realize you just illustrated perfectly the PC gamer snobbery, right?

Originally Posted by booB

Also, laptops generally have only integrated graphics cards, and you can't just swap them out. There will have to be some new sort of technology in order to do so, and I don't see it being worth it for PC manufacturers. Nobody buys laptops for their customizability; they're for portability. (Storage is a different story, of course, but that's because it makes sense to be able to easily swap out information from one laptop to another.)

There already exists external video cards for laptops, at least conceptually, but I really doubt that the general market will want them. But, in the end, laptop makers don't want you to upgrade what you have, they want laptops as semi disposable devices, something you replace rather than upgrade.

[Roper Klacks]

I guess it depends really. I play exclusively on PC. A PC that cost me 500€ to upgrade 3 years ago and still plays everything equally or better than a console.

Obviously i will have to upgrade it in a few years, thats the way technology goes. Console gamers will also have to upgrade their consoles by buying a new one. Yes they are cheaper and last a bit longer (especially this generation, i cant see a new PS or Xbox in a near future) but they also get obsolete.

For me the main advantage of PC gaming is the platform itself, its my work instrument, and it has a immensely vast gaming library (spanning decades of gaming history) compared to consoles.

But i guess the best option (if you have the money) is to have a good PC and a console, that way you'll get the best of both worlds.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Roper Klacks

Obviously i will have to upgrade it in a few years, thats the way technology goes. Console gamers will also have to upgrade their consoles by buying a new one. Yes they are cheaper and last a bit longer (especially this generation, i cant see a new PS or Xbox in a near future) but they also get obsolete.

Just like any piece of technology.

For me the main advantage of PC gaming is the platform itself, its my work instrument, and it has a immensely vast gaming library (spanning decades of gaming history) compared to consoles.

Honestly I myself don't miss the gaming library spanning decades back. Thing is, I know that I would never be able to catch up on experiencing titles from 10-20 years ago because there are too many new games coming out offering new and different kinds of experiences and if I focus on 'vintage' games I won't have time to enjoy the new games. It's give and take, sometimes either or. I just happen to choose to enjoy recent games and look forward to upcoming games.

In the end it's what the individual gamer wants. Each platform offers its set of advantages and disadvantages.

But i guess the best option (if you have the money) is to have a good PC and a console, that way you'll get the best of both worlds.

And pay at least twice as much for the convenience, unless you're willing to sacrifice a bit of PC features for a new console game because your computer's a little too old to play the same game. At least, that's what I see now and then from other gamers out there. Some of them can't afford to upgrade their PCs so they opt for the same game for a console they also own.

[Crunchy in milk]

There's always a bleeding edge crowd that has to have the latest pc hardware that can run games at ludicrously high performance. Personally as an average PC owner I have a lot to thank consoles for. Even as someone who doesn't own a 360 or PS3.

I'm grateful for their existence because of the low minimum specs on quality cross platform games. Its thanks to consoles that average PC's have benefited from a prolonged, parallel period of average specs = get to play a AAA game. Consoles have drastically curbed upgradeitus which has plagued the gaming PC for far too long.

I'll switch to consoles once digital distribution becomes commonplace for all titles. The joys of putting system envy behind you and getting the best for what you pay for from EVERY single game is just too compelling.

In regards to gaming on laptops. Its fun and I do it myself, but cutting edge graphics cards in notebooks is an exercise in frustration. The heat makes you rather reluctant to put the computer anywhere near your lap and you're reliant on headphones if only to hear something over the cooling fans trying to compensate for operating in such a confined space alongside other hot components. Few things in life are worth a hot, sweaty crotch and gaming isn't one of them (yet).

[SoccerDude28]

I do have both a PC gaming desktop and all 3 consoles, and for the most part the consoles have become my defacto gaming machines of choice for these reasons:

1- Like Trepsie said, there is something comfy about sitting on a couch and enjoying a game versus hunching in front of a PC. I personally work in the software business, so when I come home, the last thing I want is longer sessions in front of a computer.

2- Console games these days are just better. Heavy Rain, Uncharted, God of War, Gears of War 2, Fable 2, Resistance, etc.. these games can only be played on a console and they are very good. Microsoft is known to put some of its exclusive XBOX games on the PC like Gears of War, Fable and Mass Effect, but lately they have been doing so less and less. I won't be surprised if in a couple of years, barely any Microsoft studios game comes out on the PC. Sony never releases their games on the PC period. Even Tim Schafer's latest game is not released on a PC, and he has been a PC developer from day 1.

3- Games that are multi-platform come out on a console first (Assassins Creed, Call of Duty), and in most cases, the console version is the better version. The PC version is usually a lazy port with more bugs than its console counterpart.

4- Unlike what the poster above mentioned, you cannot get a gaming PC for $300. Mine cost $2000 back in 2007. I can buy 6 XBOXes and PS3's for that price.

5- For the PS3, blu-ray. It is a wonderful addition to watch stuff in HD. Add a blu-ray player to your PC, and how much extra will that cost you? For the XBOX, the live service is really good, with several excellent exclusive XBLA games you cannot play on a PC.

6- Netflix. Yes you can stream netflix on a PC, but watching it on a big screen is much better. Some people will probably hook up their PC to a tv to stream netflix on it, but for most folks, that is complicated and unpractical.

Now the reason why I still keep a gaming PC around
1- Well it is a PC, so I am using it right now to browse the internet and type this. It is much better than a console in browsing the web.

2- Lots of good flash games on facebook or indie are best played in a browser.

3- Very few awesome exclusive games like the upcoming Starcraft 2 , and WOW. Also the controls for Real Time strategy games are just way better using mouse and keyboard.

4- Adventure games of the point and click variety: you can find more of these on PC's than consoles.

and that's I think all the reasons why I own a PC. Seems like a no-brainer which one to choose right?

[HaroldO]

Originally Posted by Hannes

However, I feel like in the world of gaming, you will always end up disappointed. You can wait 4 months for the PERFECT machine, (that will play that game you've wanted) but when u get your hands on it, you've already heard about another, faster and better pc. And then you realize... Your pc doesn't play the upcoming game that you really wanted to try.

It's the world of anything tech related, really. I bought my Asus Eee PC 701 to have a cheap netbook to carry arround two years ago and it is barely a toy now. But the scenario you've just described doesn't really make sense. If by perfect you mean "being able to run the games you want smoothly" it won't become complete so soon. No developer now wants pull another Crysis, a game mythical for it's requirements at the time but ended up alienating good part of its potential costumers and now the sequel is coming up on consoles.
A good gaming laptop now should be able to still run games released in a couple of years, though some will have settings a little adjusted.

What do you guys think? Is it just easier (and cheaper) to switch to console gaming? At least that way, your machine will always play the games with full graphs with no probs. Or do you think the endless upgrading of your pc is fun?

Personal opinion: It's easier and cheaper to switch to console gaming. But choosing to do so depends on what kind of game do you like. But if you have a console you can at least upgrade or get a new PC every four-six years. This way you won't miss out on PC exclusives even if you don't play them all at launch. Just don't buy a wii j/k

[Roper Klacks]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

1- Like Trepsie said, there is something comfy about sitting on a couch and enjoying a game versus hunching in front of a PC. I personally work in the software business, so when I come home, the last thing I want is longer sessions in front of a computer.

Thats a personal thing. I don't like to play in a couch, its less intimate and it feels like i'm watching a movie or TV. I guess i was not raised playing in such an informal manner. Gamecrasher's jason Perini wrote a nice rant about this subject.

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

2- Console games these days are just better.

Sorry no. I mean for you yes. But i'm a real time strategy fan so is it correct for me to say that PC has the better games because of Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, Starcraft 2, Napoleon: Total War, Dawn of War? Or racing sims with rFactor, GTR Evo, Netkar Pro, iRacing and so on? You mentioned big hyped games, not better games. If you said: Console gamers have bigger budgets i would agree, but more money does not necessarily make a good game (although some of the games you listed are indeed good games)

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

3- Games that are multi-platform come out on a console first (Assassins Creed, Call of Duty), and in most cases, the console version is the better version. The PC version is usually a lazy port with more bugs than its console counterpart.

True, completely agree. However Call of Duty is not a good example.

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

4- Unlike what the poster above mentioned, you cannot get a gaming PC for $300. Mine cost $2000 back in 2007. I can buy 6 XBOXes and PS3's for that price.

True, you can not get a new gaming PC for 300$ (probably possible with an upgrade). But you were robbed, 2000$ for a PC is insane!

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

5- For the PS3, blu-ray. It is a wonderful addition to watch stuff in HD. Add a blu-ray player to your PC, and how much extra will that cost you? For the XBOX, the live service is really good, with several excellent exclusive XBLA games you cannot play on a PC.

Agree about the blu-ray. Live is a good service for a console, but completely useless in the PC reality. You have A LOT of indie PC games that are not in Live (or PSN).

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

6- Netflix. Yes you can stream netflix on a PC, but watching it on a big screen is much better. Some people will probably hook up their PC to a tv to stream netflix on it, but for most folks, that is complicated and unpractical.

Hooking a TV to a PC is insultingly easy. And i use my DVD player to watch movies.

[Hannes]

Originally Posted by HaroldO

It's the world of anything tech related, really. I bought my Asus Eee PC 701 to have a cheap netbook to carry arround two years ago and it is barely a toy now. But the scenario you've just described doesn't really make sense. If by perfect you mean "being able to run the games you want smoothly" it won't become complete so soon. No developer now wants pull another Crysis, a game mythical for it's requirements at the time but ended up alienating good part of its potential costumers and now the sequel is coming up on consoles.
A good gaming laptop now should be able to still run games released in a couple of years, though some will have settings a little adjusted.

You're right, and I do agree with most of what you're saying. I also meant other things than just gaming, though. I just don't understand why any company would release a brand new series of laptops or pcs and then a week later release an upgraded, better version, and week later from that, another. What's the motivation behind that?

It's quite frustrating if you think about it. In a perfect world, you'd think a brand new gaming machine would survive at least 2 years with its components, so, the game companies could actually milk your wallet dry. But nope.

As I said, it's a world of disappointment, but it doesn't have to be. I think.

As for consoles, I had Xbox 360 for a while but I really can't get to the whole console gaming. It just gives me a headache lol. My laptop runs games like Mass Effect, Bioshock 1&2 etc on high settings, so I'm rather pleased with it. But as I said, reading about new model coming a week later I got mine, and seeing a lot of nagging by people who didn't know about this, got me wondering.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Hannes

You're right, and I do agree with most of what you're saying. I also meant other things than just gaming, though. I just don't understand why any company would release a brand new series of laptops or pcs and then a week later release an upgraded, better version, and week later from that, another. What's the motivation behind that?

Making money, naturally. That's the reality of the business, sadly. They have to make their money. I think it's safe to say that almost every hardware company does this, releasing "new and improved" versions of their products, from graphics cards memory, from dual core to quad core, from 64GB to 128GB. It's cyclic. And thus, maddening for us consumers.

It's quite frustrating if you think about it. In a perfect world, you'd think a brand new gaming machine would survive at least 2 years with its components, so, the game companies could actually milk your wallet dry. But nope.

That's why I got disgusted with PC gaming, in part. I hated worrying about whether a game like, say, Crysis, was even going to run on my rig. And isn't it so disheartening to think that your PC can smoothly run a new game, you buy the game, only to see it run the game smoothly at 30 fps but only on medium graphics settings?

As I said, it's a world of disappointment, but it doesn't have to be. I think.

Right? It wouldn't have to be if there were some holy grail kind of standardization applied to all PCs to ensure that the game runs beautifully at maximum settings on at least 99% of them. But there are tons of different kinds of PCs out there, tons of different configurations. It's crazy.

As for consoles, I had Xbox 360 for a while but I really can't get to the whole console gaming. It just gives me a headache lol.My laptop runs games like Mass Effect, Bioshock 1&2 etc on high settings, so I'm rather pleased with it. But as I said, reading about new model coming a week later I got mine, and seeing a lot of nagging by people who didn't know about this, got me wondering.

Well, think of it this way. It's like an RPG with its leveling up. You choose certain skills or talents that will improve your character one way, but only at the expense of not getting other skills or talents that can improve the character in other ways. You can't have it all so you have to focus on what you want and just live without whatever else you wanted.

[Little Writer]

Ah, this old discussion.

I played PC games from 1992 till 2001, going through three desktops and one laptop.

Then I switched to console gaming, first a PS1 and then a PS2.

Meanwhile I still played PC games, but only the older ones since I couldn't run anything new.

I too preferred the easiness of new console releases: just put in the disc and you're set. No installation necessary, no twiddling with graphics setting without knowing what you are doing, spending hours on forums trying to find solutions for compatibility problems, etc.

If you're no tech-wiz, consoles will always be easier. I remember buying some extra RAM for one of my earlier systems, opening the case and installing it, constantly terrified of doing something wrong and ruining the whole thing.

Late 2008 I got a new laptop and I've been playing a bit of catch-up of games released since 1999. I can probably still run new releases, but I'm starting to doubt that. But I'm not willing to run the risk of buying a game and then finding out it won't work, a risk which is non-existant for consoles.

All I know is: each individual PC lasted me a good three years before new games became unplayable, while my PS2 lasted at least six (up till the moment when no new interesting PS2-games were released). That PS2 cost me 250 euro, while those PC's are an average of at least 500 each.

Personally, I like playing on PC as well as on console, and I have nothing against either one. But sometimes it's easier, and more satisfying, to go with one of them instead of the other. It's what you prefer.

[imisssunwell]

Consoles usually are better value for money.

Consoles usually are better in terms of quality (graphics, fps) during the beginning of their lifespan and worse off at the end of it.

Some games play better in consoles (e.g. Mass Effect) and some better on PC (e.g. Dragon Age, the top down view is PC-only).

That being said, if someone if willing to keep up with the costs of maintaining a top notch PC rig, he will indeed get the better performance & better graphics. Personally, I use laptops as well (yes I'm a fanboy!), for my "pc gaming", and I face similar problems, I bought the best laptop around in 2008 and now I can't play Dragon Age on max settings. However I didn't get this laptop just for gaming, my actual work involves doing numerics, a good gpu is of help anyhow, so it wasn't hard to find an excuse for my department to get me the best Macbook Pro of 2008

[DustyShinigami]

I used to just stick to PC gaming myself. Older titles though. I never bothered with all the latest releases as they never interested me as much as they do now. When a friend inspired me, I decided to get an XBOX console (the 360) and everything eventually changed. My first 360 game was Hitman: Blood Money, which I enjoyed, but I didn't think I'd end up buying that many titles for the console and so I still used my PC. When I started looking into newer titles - researching them, checking reviews, trying them out etc - that's when I started giving my console more attention. I started playing PC games less and less.

Nowadays, I'd say I give them an equal amount of attention. My PC is medium range and I use it mostly for listening to music, surfing the internet, using the odd piece of software/program and playing older games - usually from 1990-2004/05. I am able to play the odd 2006-10 game if they aren't too demanding though, such as Machinarium, Sam & Max, Tales of Monkey Island etc. But I'll just stick to my 360 for the latest titles. I can't be bothered nor can I keep affording to update my PC all the time. As others have already said, at least games you buy for the consoles will work as soon as you insert the discs (so long as the discs aren't scratched, of course ). No upgrading components, no checking system requirements, no DRM etc.

Although the latest games will never look or run as great as they would if you had a high end computer, it's still great to have something like a 360/PS3 that's designed to play these games and where they still look and run fantastic.

And anyway, if this OnLive is as good as it sounds and it delivers, it may convert people back to PC gaming.