alan wake xbox only ?

[dr.stevil]

^ exactly... and if you wanted to play devils advocate, you could even argue that the people who game exclusively on a console get the short end of the stick more often than PC people do. The PC gets a shit load more exclusives than both combined and 99% of the time, gets a superior version of a multi-platform title (if you have the hardware to run it obviously)

it sucks that alan wake isn't going to the PC, but what are you gonna do? There are plenty of other good games on the horizon

 

[Serpico]

This was announced months ago. This and their constant shutdown of MS published PC game developers further proved what I'd felt for a long time: that Microsoft has absolutely zero interest in the PC as a gaming platform and is more than happy to sacrifice it if it will push 360 adoption.

Why should they stop at selling a gamer a copy of Windows, something that is in the bag anyway unless they are the small group that uses OS X or Linux, when they can also collect licenses on every game sold, make money on movie sales/rentals and microtransactions, and sell high margin hardware accessories? A 360 gamer is potentially much more profitable to them than a PC gamer.

Microsoft is no friend of the PC gamer, don't forget that.

 

[BladeVenom]

it sucks that alan wake isn't going to the PC, but what are you gonna do?

Not buy it. And never buy a 360 or any other piece of console trash made by the backstabbing bastards at MS.

 

[Stereophile]

And in this case exclusives are great, right? Which proves my ealier point in which you didn't bother quoting.

Which boils down to the specific people thinking:
MS making games exclusive to xbox = crap
Sony making games exclusive = A++.

End result both sucks in my opinion

There is a large difference between Sony creating new exclusive content for their console, and MS buying out studios and and limiting access to existing+emergent PC games. Sony is adding to your choices, MS is co-opting the PC game industry, leeching it to support their console.

 

[Sent]

Yeah not gonna be picking this up /shrug. Dropped off my radar long ago. As the guy above said it isn't that MS created it from the ground up as an Xbox exclusive, no one would care about that.

 

[lgestle]

There is a large difference between Sony creating new exclusive content for their console, and MS buying out studios and and limiting access to existing+emergent PC games. Sony is adding to your choices, MS is co-opting the PC game industry, leeching it to support their console.

Kind of like what sony did with ghostbusters in the UK with Atari? So pretty much your statement regarding why MS is different, can apply to this situation? As mentioned they both pull the same crap, but rooting for one side on a continuous basis and calling foul when it's not in your favor is pretty rediculous.

Exclusive contents is crap regardless of the method, I'm not the one pretending otherwise.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...S3-first-PC-and-Xbox-360-delayed-Update/News/

Apparently the temporarily PS3 and PS2 exclusiveness of Ghostbusters: The Video Game is restricted to Europe and the regions using the PAL system. Ghostbusters: The Video Game will be published on June 16, 2009 in North America for PC, PS3, PS2, Wii and Nintendo DS. In Europe and the PAL region the game will be released on June 19, 2009 for PS3 and PS2 says bluesnews.com. Atari did not reveal when the game will be published in Europe for the other platforms.

 

[tgg]

Its all a money thing, the publisher and devolper agree with verbal and problably money going to the developwer to keep the games either exlusive to one platform or agree to wait a while to release it on another platform in this case since we talking about ala wake it should be the pc and not the ps3.

They do this to sell consoles, it gets everone like us all worked up and excited and will have hte urge to buy a console just for the game. Just look what happen to halo 1, halo 2, the gears of war games, they had people buy consoles just for those games.

This buying a console for a particualr games happens all the time it happen to me and im sure it happen to you guys. theres uncharted gmaes for ps3, etc etc we do this all the time. A while back I bought a 360 off ebay jsut to play fable 2, and couple others that wont come out on pc or ps3.

 

[rampantandroid]

And again, test matrix on PC. Don't forget that. On a PC, you need to worry about ATI and nVidia, which shader model, which driver? What CPU, what instruction sets does it have? How much RAM? How fast is your system, what OS? The game needs to scale from shit PC to uber PC, so you end up with issues like in COD2 where you could turn smoke off...and BF2 where people with a better card can see further....

On the 360, it's the SAME CPU, the same GPU, the same RAM...you write the game to look like THIS. And that's it. Testing it? Put it in an xbox or PS3, and you're done. The test matrix for the PC is several orders of magnitude worse than consoles. Consoles are just EASIER to do....and until PCs are figured out and made more standard, it'll remain that way. There's a reason Crytek came out and said PC graphics won't improve until the next generation of consoles comes out. They're right, too. There's no new Crysis-like jump coming soon. There's moving that to consoles with CryEngine 3, sure...but that's it. Consoles will only see improvements with more efficient code, but the hardware is a stationary target. Consoles force good coding, you can't throw a new CPU or GPU or more RAM at the problem, you can only throw a new console at it, and that happens ever half a decade.

And that's another reason to go with a console. Anyone remember HL2's delays? One delay was because they were chasing hardware around. You won't see that NEARLY as often on a console. You may see more storage space added, or a new controller (say, Natal) but you won't see more RAM, a new GPU, new DX version or anything until a new console comes out...which happens every what, 5 years or so? More?

So you bought a shitty desk chair and can't figure out how to plug your video card into your tv?

Or, I don't want to put a noisy ass gaming PC next to my TV and sound system, run a headphone cable to my recliner for me to trip on to drown out the noise...have a KB and Mouse on recliner (Yeah. No. Controller fits in my hands. Everything easy to access. KB on my lap? Fuck that.) Console + couch is just simpler. I may very well say to hell with getting a new monitor and save the money for a giant TV, then get something like Ion for browsing from the couch..but that's it.

hmmm, maybe my computer is too old to play the game, and I can't currently afford to upgrade my computer? hmmmmm? maybe? maybe?
not everybody has a new(ish) computer, you know.

Another thing. Someone wants to say that this game will cost 260 since you'll have to buy an XBox? Yeah. Lets assume it came out as a DX10 game back 2 years ago, with awesome CPU based physics. So, that's a Q6600, so what, $350 (USD) or so, whatever it was then...an 8800 GTS, so 350 there too...I mean, jesus, the game already costs 600-700 USD. Lets talk about what's cheaper...I mean, even if you take the cheap route, and go cheap ATI and AMD stuff, it'll still peak over 200 USD for it all, esp if you need DDR2 or DDR3 RAM. Costs? Yeah. REAL strong advantage consoles have there.

 

[Serpico]

There is a large difference between Sony creating new exclusive content for their console, and MS buying out studios and and limiting access to existing+emergent PC games. Sony is adding to your choices, MS is co-opting the PC game industry, leeching it to support their console.

QFT, nailed it.

Microsoft shutting down studios like Ensemble, killing Flight Simulator, and pushing developers that are left like Bungie and Remedy to produce only for the 360 tells you all you need to know.

 

[theNoid]

Sorry but games designed for consoles are console crap. There are some major design compromises that have to be made and then a ton of small ones. The major ones are unchangeable and the developers usually don't even bother with the small ones (no mouse usage in menus etc...).

1. If you knew anything about Alan Wake you would know that both platforms were designed on their own from the ground up.
2. As a PC gamer you are in the very small minority of the gaming community, watch who you insult as you are more than likely to offend your peers.
3. Ports are ports, prior to this generation console gamers got shit PC ports, this gen you have to suck it too it seems. Most ports are not handled by the developers themselves, but rather outsourced to 3rd parties to cut costs. A shitty port is a shitty port, regardless of what platform it originated on.

 

[theNoid]

QFT, nailed it.

Microsoft shutting down studios like Ensemble, killing Flight Simulator, and pushing developers that are left like Bungie and Remedy to produce only for the 360 tells you all you need to know.

PC platform is slowly dying and the monopolized conglomerate that created the backbone OS knows it?

edit. I'm a pc gamer as well.

 

[rampantandroid]

QFT, nailed it.

Microsoft shutting down studios like Ensemble, killing Flight Simulator, and pushing developers that are left like Bungie and Remedy to produce only for the 360 tells you all you need to know.

Where did GoW start? To the best of my knowledge, it was a XBox "exclusive" from day one.

Fable 1, Big Blue Box had no publisher until MS came along.

Would Halo have seen Halo 2, 3, ODST, Reach and tentatively, even a Halo 4, without MS?

Where did Mass Effect start, and where would it be without MS Game Studios behind it?

Also, Halo Wars...RTS on a console, quite fun. With above, without MS, would this have happened? Unlikely.

The 360 has PLENTY of content that exists because MS invested in it that might not have happened without them.

Again, this is just the PC gamers and PS3 gamers crying about exclusive games; the former because PC gaming sometimes looks like it's on it's last leg, the latter because the PS3 has one game that's exclusive that anyone gives a shit about. PC gaming is suffering because console games are more friendly for a group of people to pile into a living room and have fun, they're cheaper, easier to maintain...viruses? Or not. Cry all you like about console exclusive games, and cry all you like about PC games. If PC gaming did not matter to MS, would we have seen DX10 be released? DX11? They don't help the 360 now do they?

 

[jonneymendoza]

Some people like sitting on the comfortable couch playing on their big televisions. Sure you can do that with a PC if you really wanted to, but you'd have to invest more time and money building a HTPC capable of playing today's games. There is a certain convenience factor with consoles that you just don't get with the PC.

Don't get me wrong, I play my share of PC games (currently playing through Dragon Age), but it is actually very easy to justify playing games on a console IMO.


edit: Also, odds are the game will make it's way to the PC eventually. Several Xbox "exclusives" have found there way there in the past.

more time and money? an HTPC is cheaper then a gaming pc in many aspects.

Their is also a load of benifits on a htpc over a console too. .mkv playback ready without streaming or encoding, Hook up your satallite(Sky TV its called in the uk) to your htpc as well as browsing the internet with no limitations and did i mention yet? play 1080p/60fps games on a ps3, 360 or any other third party controller you wish to use.

 

[BladeVenom]

Where did GoW start? To the best of my knowledge, it was a XBox "exclusive" from day one.

GoW did not start out for the 360. Look at Epics games before that. They are almost all PC games. They started the game on the PC then MS saw it and bought the rights to it. Then MS decided to screw PC gamers for the benefit of the 360.

Fable 1, Big Blue Box had no publisher until MS came along.

Peter Molyneux is the second biggest name in gaming next to Wil Wright. He could have gotten his game published without MS. He's been getting games published long before the Xbox was ever even dreamed about.

Would Halo have seen Halo 2, 3, ODST, Reach and tentatively, even a Halo 4, without MS?

You make endless sequels sound like a good thing. Halo would have come out without MS, but on the PC. Bungie was into innovative games, not an endless string of mindless sequels.

Where did Mass Effect start, and where would it be without MS Game Studios behind it?

Bioware was doing fine before MS Game Studios. Every hear of a little game called Baldur's Gate, or Neverwinter Nights. Without MS Game Studios, Mass Effect would probably have been an even better game. It would have also had a simultaneous release on the PC. MS made them delay the PC version to benefit the 360 and to screw over PC gaming.

Also, Halo Wars...RTS on a console, quite fun. With above, without MS, would this have happened? Unlikely.

MS shutdown Ensemble Studios as soon as the game was done, but before it was even released. They didn't even wait to see if Halo Wars was going to be a success.

Age of Empires series was one of the best selling PC games of all time, and sold over 20 millions copies. It outsold Halo Wars which sold over 1 million. So Ensemble Studios would have done much better if the Xbox had never come about.

The only reason I can think of that MS even made Halo Wars, was so that the people at Ensemble didn't leave and form their own PC gaming studio. They kept them busy on Halo Wars, until they could split them up and move them around the company. They had no faith in Halo Wars, the whole thing was a scheme to screw PC gaming.

 

[jonneymendoza]

Well said mate

 

[Stereophile]

Kind of like what sony did with ghostbusters in the UK with Atari?

A few months timed exclusivity in one region, for a game based on a film they own the rights to, coinciding with a 25th anniversary BD release, is bit narrower of a scenario than MS buying up PC game properties whole and refusing to even release, or confirm a release of a PC version.

It's a bit of a stretch to compare Sony's actions to the way MS has raped PC gaming.

I think it's been part of MS's long term strategy to marginalize PC gaming.

 

[RexPokinghorn]

You bought hardware for an unreleased game. That didn't even have a release date...and was just a tech demo. Congrats, I hope you learned your lesson well.

I sure did. I learned that a quad core CPU is great for many intensive applications like compiling code and encoding.

 

[LeninGHOLA]

Or, I don't want to put a noisy ass gaming PC next to my TV and sound systemWhy build a noisy computer? Drive thrashing on consoles is easily noisier than a well built PC, run a headphone cable to my recliner for me to trip on to drown out the noiseWireless? Or, again, stop building noicy PC's...have a KB and Mouse on recliner (Yeah. No. Controller fits in my hands. Everything easy to access. KB on my lap? Fuck that.)Buy a wireless controller for the PC Console + couch is just simpler.If you can stand ridiculous load times on ALL console games I may very well say to hell with getting a new monitor and save the money for a giant TV, then get something like Ion for browsing from the couch..but that's it.

Sure, there are benefits to console gaming, especially hardware compatability and driver issues, but why do you think the PC has fewer options than a console? It clearly is more versatile. Obviously, do whatever you prefer, but don't pretend a PC is a lesser gaming platform, especially in the PC gaming subforums.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

You make endless sequels sound like a good thing. Halo would have come out without MS, but on the PC. Bungie was into innovative games, not an endless string of mindless sequels.

Actually, it would have been a Macintosh game without Microsoft. Learn 2 history.

 

[rampantandroid]

Sure, there are benefits to console gaming, especially hardware compatability and driver issues, but why do you think the PC has fewer options than a console? It clearly is more versatile. Obviously, do whatever you prefer, but don't pretend a PC is a lesser gaming platform, especially in the PC gaming subforums.

OK, you're getting it.

A: Core i7, overclocked, Raptors in RAID 0, GTX280 gets noisy...it's a fucking gaming system. It also uses a HAF932 which has gigantic fans to reduce noise. My 360 is FAR quieter than my PC, given I install the game to the drive.

I'm a god damn audiophile, so I don't want to deal with wireless; I want good quality audio, and that ALREADY costs more money than to buy the cheapest headphone out there. I don't want to pay even more for wireless that I need to worry about recharging, when will the battery go? Etc. You're telling me to spend hundreds more just to use a PC with my TV...so I'll again say, fuck it, I'll take my console.

I play on the PC for the mouse and KB. If I want to play with a controller, I WILL USE THE FUCKING XBOX. Pairing a controller with the PC is POINTLESS when you own an XBox.

Ever see load times when you install the game to the hard drive? Bet you haven't...they're quite nice. Load times on Halo 3 for me were 10 seconds or less. Certainly about as long as COD4 load times on the PC.

You're full of it, dude.

Is the PC lesser[for gaming]? Yes. Do I like PC gaming? Yes. Do I think it'll die? Within 10 years, something will replace it, I'm pretty sure.

 

[quadnad]

rant

His point is that everything you can do with a console, you can do at least as well with a PC. You can make a quiet gaming PC, regardless of what your own personal system's noise profile is.

This is a pointless discussion that has been hashed out tons of times..

 

[LeninGHOLA]

OK, you're getting it.

A: Core i7, overclocked, Raptors in RAID 0, GTX280 gets noisy...it's a fucking gaming system. It also uses a HAF932 which has gigantic fans to reduce noise. My 360 is FAR quieter than my PC, given I install the game to the drive. You bought a pair of the noisiest hard drives known to man, and you're comparing it to an xbox, nice.

I'm a god damn audiophileWho settles for xbox 360 sound and put raptors in his PC, so I don't want to deal with wireless; I want good quality audio, and that ALREADY costs more money than to buy the cheapest headphone out there. I don't want to pay even more for wireless that I need to worry about recharging, when will the battery go? Etc. You're telling me to spend hundreds more just to use a PC with my TV...so I'll again say, fuck it, I'll take my console. You chose to build a noisy PC. People who use their PC's as audio encoding devices or in a studio...use a quiet PC, you can make a gaming PC quiet, mine is. As far as the spending of money goes, you were the one saying you would buy a giant tv and an ION system just to meet your needs. Keep spending money on extra devices when you could have done it all on one PC

I play on the PC for the mouse and KB. If I want to play with a controller, I WILL USE THE FUCKING XBOX. Pairing a controller with the PC is POINTLESS when you own an XBox.Unless of course you wanted to play games that look better but are intended for a controller. I bought Batman AA for PC, use a controller. Far better experience than a console can give you. Period

Ever see load times when you install the game to the hard drive? Bet you haven't...they're quite nice.I have indeed, they are abysmal compared to a PC, especially one with an SSD. Load times on Halo 3 for me were 10 seconds or less. Certainly about as long as COD4 load times on the PC. Xbox hardrives simply aren't fast enough to compete with a PC hardrive on any level

You're full of it, dude. No, hard drive installed xbox games still load 5x+ slower than a PC. Fallout 3 is a great example

Is the PC lesser[for gaming]? Yes.I agree, settling for lower res, blurry textures, closed systems and no option for customization is THE FUCKING FUTURE, YAY Do I like PC gaming? Yes. Do I think it'll die? Within 10 years, something will replace it, I'm pretty sure.

Use your console, if you prefer it, that is cool. I have an xbox too, I prefer to play a handful of games on it too (madden, fight night). But overall, PC gaming just brings more to the table, without question

 

[gimp]

Use your console, if you prefer it, that is cool. I have an xbox too, I prefer to play a handful of games on it too (madden, fight night). But overall, PC gaming just brings more to the table, without question

so to you, gaming is all about graphics and load times.
right?

that's pretty much what you're saying.

generally, investing in a console and games is far less expensive than a computer and games.

 

[rampantandroid]

Use your console, if you prefer it, that is cool. I have an xbox too, I prefer to play a handful of games on it too (madden, fight night). But overall, PC gaming just brings more to the table, without question

I have no doubt it can, My point in this thread is that people are going overboard; Yes, there is NO DOUBT PC gaming CAN bring more to the table. But lately, it hasn't. It hasn't for YEARS. Nothing like Deus Ex, System Shock 2 (I don't count Bioshock...it bored me to tears :-P) and there have been plenty cross platform games that have been great (Dead Space for example)

I'm largely playing devils advocate here, for everyone who just sits here and bitches about consoles. Like you, I have a PC and an XBox for a reason - COD4, and pretty much any multiplayer FPS, PC is what I use. Anything PC exclusive...well, that's obvious...and everything else I play onthe xbox, unless the pC version is way better.

My point with my posts is that a console can in some situations be superior. Frankly, I think it is superior in many situations. One point I made no one has tried to refute is the cost. Console gaming is gaming for the masses. PC gaming is by far more a minority IMO. It really has always been a niche market, it's just that console gaming is exposing that more and more, if not exacerbating the issue. Your $400 off the shelf Acer PC can't really play any game you want, whereas a $200 console can.

There's a reason games are moving to the console, I can go into the development & testing costs and all...and I'm sure plenty of people have said it all before me, too.

My point is, stop ripping consoles. Hell, I think someone pointed out that the PC and Console dev work for this game were separate, so they likely just shut the one down.

tl;dr version: I screamed PC tards.

I'll spend the time to reply to your red comments in the quote AFTER lunch


Edit:

so to you, gaming is all about graphics and load times.
right?

that's pretty much what you're saying.

generally, investing in a console and games is far less expensive than a computer and games.

That's my biggest point I made. Even with console games costing $10 more...

 

[LeninGHOLA]

so to you, gaming is all about graphics and load times.
right?

that's pretty much what you're saying.

generally, investing in a console and games is far less expensive than a computer and games.

Nah, that isn't just what I am saying. I mean to say that a PC is far more useful all around. If all anyone used a PC for was gaming, then the comparison might be closer. People say the TV cost can't be added in to the cost of owning a console because people already have one, but then by that standard, neither can a PC since people already have one. You would need to compare the price of a video card and possibly a processor to that of a console. And when you do that you need to consider resolution, so you would only need to compare a video card that can play games at the reduced resolutions the 360 plays at. Most cards over $75 will be able to do that. Pair that with a $99 CPU and you come out alot less than a console, yet it would be more capable, unless your base PC is 8 years old, but then you couldn't compare it to a 4 year old console, could you? If you insist on comparing a whole pc system with a monitor, to a console without a tv in price, I will have to say those 2 situations are far from analogous.

Sure, you can buy a $200 console and call it good, but then you won't be loading games on your xbox hardrive will you? So back again to the dvd drive thrashing argument, right?

This is all with leaving out the fact that you could toss a blu-ray player in your PC, or stream movies using the PC as an htpc. You can't do those things with an xbox. Nor are you able to post at the [H] on your xbox.

I'm not ripping consoles at all, I'm just pointing out what I feel are mistakes with the anti PC gaming posts.

I feel consoles definitely have their place, they are handy, fun, and can meet the gaming needs of some people. Though to say that it is superior to a PC is basing your opinion on gut reaction rather than logic.

I don't think you're stupid for preferring console gaming, I just think you are dismissing many important facts when you write it off.

 

[BladeVenom]

Actually, it would have been a Macintosh game without Microsoft. Learn 2 history.

When MS bought Bungie they hadn't been Mac exclusive for years. So it would have come out as a PC game like I said, and likely a Mac game also. The Myth series, and Oni came out on the PC; I have them.

 

[BladeVenom]

generally, investing in a console and games is far less expensive than a computer and games.

Don't you own a computer?

Investing in a PC with a graphics card is cheaper than a PC and console.

When you add it all up, if you play games a lot, going the console route is more expensive.

 

[gimp]

Don't you own a computer?

Investing in a PC with a graphics card is cheaper than a PC and console.

When you add it all up, if you play games a lot, going the console route is more expensive.

I have a 6'ish year old computer. (okay, actually closer to 8 years... it originally had an Athlon XP 2700+ released in 2002)
I have an AGP slot.
nothing can be done to make it worthwhile.
well, $200 certainly couldn't revive my dinosaur.
I don't exactly ugprade often....

sure, I could spend ~$400+ to ugprade my computer and play computer games. But instead, I went and spent $200 on an Xbox.

I'd rather spend ~$200 every 5(ish) years on a new console, then spend ~$400 every 5(ish) years on upgraded computer components. Ok, it would be more than 5 yrs, since I've never bought a console around release time, I always wait for it to drop in price.

besides, it is more comfortable (for me) gaming when sitting on my couch. Sure, a computer could be hooked up to a tv, but I also listen/watch tv when I'm on my computer. So it would be kinda hard to be dinkin around on my computer (browsing or what have you) and still watch tv, without a second tv.

Nah, that isn't just what I am saying. I mean to say that a PC is far more useful all around.

most of your rants have been on graphics, resolution, and load times.... so that's how you're coming off with your posts.

well sure, but a computer not used for gaming can be a VERY inexpensive PC that can last years, and won't need upgraded to play the latest-and-greatest game. So invest in a ~$300 refurb from Dell that can last YEARS (ok, maybe not, being a Dell and all). $200 and a console. So that's $500 that will last ~5 years or so (depending on development cycle for next gen consoles).

There isn't a drastic difference in cost, since to SEE the latest-and-greatest on a PC you will be (relatively) constantly upgrading components so that you can play the games with a higher detail level.

 

[BladeVenom]

sure, I could spend ~$400+ to ugprade my computer and play computer games. But instead, I went and spent $200 on an Xbox.

I'd rather spend ~$200 every 5(ish) years on a new console, then spend ~$400 every 5(ish) years on upgraded computer components. Ok, it would be more than 5 yrs, since I've never bought a console around release time, I always wait for it to drop in price.

Add five years of Xbox live to the cost of your console. Add in the price difference of games for five years.

I spend more time playing mods than I do the original game. Most of the time the only way you get extra content on a console is to pay for it. So I'd have to have more than twice as many console games to get the same amount of new content.

 

[LeninGHOLA]

most of your rants have been on graphics, resolution, and load times.... so that's how you're coming off with your posts.

I'm not going to say those things arent important either, all 3 affecting immersion greatly.

I actually save alot of money by PC gaming. I mean some of those Steam sales have been retarded good, $1.99 for STALKER? Yes please

 

[gimp]

I'm not going to say those things arent important either, all 3 affecting immersion greatly.

I actually save alot of money by PC gaming. I mean some of those Steam sales have been retarded good, $1.99 for STALKER? Yes please

you do have a point.

BUT, aren't the savings (at least somewhat) lost by upgrading components in your computer?

I do enjoy gaming on my PC. But seeing as I currently need to replace EVERYTHING to get an even DECENT machine, the console is cheaper for me. Maybe not in the long run, but it's hard for me to save up for investments

I will say that I definitely prefer FPS on a computer, and control sensitivity is generally more adjustable on a PC (Godfather 2 with sensitivity at it's highest still sucks on the 360).

Graphics can help, I agree. But to get that higher resolution and more detailed graphics you need beefier hardware = more money invested.

Both console gaming and PC gaming have trade-offs. Consoles (may be) more expensive in the long run with a cheaper initial investment, but cannot provide the same quality of graphics as a PC, which can have a higher initial-investment. No doubt about it, and I'm certainly not disputing any of that.

 

[BladeVenom]

you do have a point.

BUT, aren't the savings (at least somewhat) lost by upgrading components in your computer?

I do enjoy gaming on my PC. But seeing as I currently need to replace EVERYTHING to get an even DECENT machine, the console is cheaper for me. Maybe not in the long run, but it's hard for me to save up for investments

But if you're willing to settle for console quality graphics, a $50 4650 probably will provide the same graphics or better than a 360. Remember that the 360 can't even do graphically intense games at 720.

If people only upgraded when they absolutely had to, then PC gaming is cheaper. If you want the latest and greatest, and want to keep up with Jonses that's when it gets expensive.

 

[michael.pa2]

I find it ironic that people will put out the money for high def big screen TV's,blu-ray players,cell phones with everything but the kitchen sink built into them - but are willing to settle for consoles that are three to four years behind in technology for gaming.

 

[gimp]

I find it ironic that people will put out the money for high def big screen TV's,blu-ray players,cell phones with everything but the kitchen sink built into them - but are willing to settle for consoles that are three to four years behind in technology for gaming.

because not everybody's into PC-gaming?

play PC multiplayer with friends at your house... ok everybody bring your computer so we can LAN, time to clear out the kitchen and dining room!

console? 4 people on 1 screen/1 console.

who cares if the hardware-technology in the consoles is old if the game is still fun and enjoyable?



what I don't understand is how some people don't understand how the economy works, and console-gaming is largely more popular than PC-gaming, due to it's ease of use.

c'mon people, America is turning stupid and fat, console is where it's at. (very broad generalization here, not pointing fingers or anything at anybody in particular).

 

[jonneymendoza]

because not everybody's into PC-gaming?

play PC multiplayer with friends at your house... ok everybody bring your computer so we can LAN, time to clear out the kitchen and dining room!

console? 4 people on 1 screen/1 console.

who cares if the hardware-technology in the consoles is old if the game is still fun and enjoyable?



what I don't understand is how some people don't understand how the economy works, and console-gaming is largely more popular than PC-gaming, due to it's ease of use.

c'mon people, America is turning stupid and fat, console is where it's at. (very broad generalization here, not pointing fingers or anything at anybody in particular).

Sorry but split screen MP is becoming rare in console gaming because of the likes of LIVE/PSN pushing online gaming and how consoles cant cope with split screen MP on some games without stripping the graphics and physics down.

Also, all sports games on the pc can be played on one screen.

edit: nither the ps3 and 360 are good for playing with mates localy imo. get a wii for that

 

[kuyaglen]

It just makes me angry...

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/62356

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2010/02/12/alan-wake-pc-officially-cancelled/1

 

[quadnad]

It just makes me angry...

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/62356

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2010/02/12/alan-wake-pc-officially-cancelled/1

sigh....

 

[maxius]

Microsoft is telling us how we should play games this is REALLY SHITTY LET THE RAGE CONSUME THEM

"Some games are more suited for the intimacy of the PC, and others are best played from the couch in front of a larger TV screen. We ultimately realised that the most compelling way to experience "Alan Wake" was on the Xbox 360 platform, so we focused on making it an Xbox 360 exclusive. Both Microsoft and Remedy have long histories in PC game development. This decision was about matching this specific game to the right platform."

i hope this pr shithead is fired and microsoft changes its plans

 

[infect0]

#1 Silly argument....some people like consoles...some people like PC...end of story.

#2 Xbox360 is a loud machine.

#3 Cost is fairly similar...anyone who argues otherwise is a fool...too many variables. Also, dont use the "Xbox360 is $200" argument. There are a lot of little extras that goes on top of the $200.

 

[infect0]

Just wanted to add....

For all PC owners (I am one as well)...PC gaming does not bring in the sales of consoles. Get over it and realize that for the time being the money is in making console games.