What do you think I've been saying?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Console Gaming VS PC Gaming - Visuals
- Thread starter speedy523
- Start date
That's my issue. They are not cheaper for "your" purposes and preferences, but the they are cheaper in physical dollars to play a game.
Sorry, that wasn't meant so much as a critique of what you specifically said, just an expression of frustration that this argument is even taking place here. Although given the way the thread started out I suppose it was pretty much destined to end this way.
Why don't you go reread the thread again since you missed it the first time - no they aren't.
I take no offense, and more so I agree with what you're saying. People for some reason are trying to justify consoles beyond "I like to play on them" and there really isn't any other justification. How you game is a personal preference.
I'm reading, I have yet to see a number lower than a Xbox 360 price using MSRP or market value on both platforms. Even using your numbers you listed it's still more in physical dollars. I'm unsure on why we are arguing as well as I have yet to see any physical $ number for a PC that is less than a Xbox 360 Arcade, Pro, or Elite.
And before you quote your one system with the HD4850 please note I was including 2 refreshes in the xbox figure, the Xbox 360 and Xbox 720, for the 654.99 figure.
The OP wasn't asking about which is cheaper. The question was straight forward.
kumquatsrus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,326
pc and console teh suxor n graphx, b&w gameboy handheld ftw
I have always used the price it is AT THIS MOMENT, nothing else. It still doesn't matter. If the Xbox 360 Arcade costs more than the 4850, so I'm not sure what your point is. Its still more expensive, even on sale.
You really lack basic comprehension, don't you? The PS3 and Xbox 360 are very much moving to be PCs. Think about it. They *do* have a web browser (Well, the PS3 does, not sure about the 360), they do have an OS, they have media streaming from a local server, streaming movies from the internet, downloadable movies, folding at home, picture viewing, music playback, syncing with USB drives, etc.. They do much more than just play games. Their focus is shifting more to that of an HTPC. They are becoming more generalized. Of course, the Xbox was literally just a PC shoved into a box, but hey. Hell, the 360 is running the .NET framework.
Neither, that was my point. We can't start counting things like that as it is a slippery slope, which is the same reason we can't count sales, clearances, e-coupons, etc...
Name one console that can do DX10, 10.1, or 11? Oh wait, you can't, it doesn't exist. My old 7900GT (that I just recently replaced) launched June of 05 - 3+ years ago. The Athlon64 X2 also came out May/June 05, again 3+ years ago. Such a system is still capable of playing modern games (like CoD4) at 1280x1024 just fine (a higher resolution than the 360 and PS3 play CoD4 at, by the way). So there you go, a 3+ year old system that can play all available games released for the PC (even did Crysis @ 1024x768 all mediums)
Hell, my old 9700 Pro + Athlon XP can still play Half-Life 2 Episode 2 just fine at 1280x1024, and it did GRAW at 800x600. Sure, I had to lower the settings, but it is a 6 year old card (and it still looked better than the PS2).
That depends on what you define as a "generation". A console generation is 5-6 years. A PC generation is ~18 months. Old PCs can still play modern games just fine.
Wow you guys win! The HD4850 is less than the Xbox 360, if you already had a PC to put it in, and you have a 7900GT that can play every game available including DX 10 titles on Vista.
This is my point:
Every Xbox 360 game can play and will play every Xbox 360 Title released now and in the future: Yes or No?
Every midrange box can play every windows game released now and in the future: Yes or No?
If we only include price out the door, lets say C0D4, which one is more expensive. Not how much it costs you 6 years from now, only how much out the door. No monitor, No TV, No 3 controllers, No extra cables. You have nothing but a Monitor or TV and you want to play C0D4: Xbox 360 or PC? I already ran the numbers for 6 years showing replacing the console twice at an estimate 300$ per console and it was still less.
If the Xbox 360 allows people to play similar games that are on the PC, why the hate? What does it matter to you? Buyers Remorse? I could care less what people buy, I have both a PC and Xbox 360, but the argument I have is price. Not performance, not resolution, not graphics, not I get X for free. It's price. How much does playing a game cost out of pocket to play.
Every person that argues a console runs like crap and argues over features does not own both, as you stated. I'm not saying everyone should own an xbox 360, nor am I saying everyone that has an Xbox 360 should own a PC. What I consider a usefull feature, can also be considered a constraint by another person. It's up to the person to depend on what "they" get for the most from an expense. However, people are arguing PC Gaming as a cheaper sport compared to a console. That logic I have a problem with.
It just looks silly when people try to compare prices and what I have seen so far is someone comparing 3X Controller at MSRP prices (and used now prices for pc parts and shouldn't this be optional? Not many pc games you can play on the same system at the same time and I'm not charging 3X computers so your friends can play at your expense), 300$ in disposable batteries (Obviously they didn't know there was a charge/play pack for 13$ off of amazon), and later started including bundled games (grid where as the xbox occasionally bundles games as well). The point is if you need to start resorting to these numbers your "reaching". It's about as "reaching" if I included the power savings of the 175 watt xbox 360 comparing to a gaming rig over 6 years. I can't even read that and not get a laugh.
The point is I'm not a pc gamer for price, I find it a great value. I also find the xbox a great value. I confident the majority of people that argue it's cheaper to pc game are the same people that upgrade at least every other generation, myself included. I will continue to be a pc gamer but at the same time I realize why others are choosing xbox, as much as many of my friends, it's the cheapest price out of pocket and for the forseable future to play every up coming game on that generation.
The original poster asked if he would see a difference migrating to a pc with a HD4870x2 from an Xbox 360. Obviously price is no object here and yes he will see a difference. I'm not arguing the fact. The point is the thread derailed into a Console cost more than a PC to game with. Short term, long term, one is cheaper. I'm not saying one looks better, just one in cheaper.
Either case I don't think I have the problem understanding this point and you don't believe you have a problem either. Nobody can win in this situation and I'll leave the thread.
This is my point:
Every Xbox 360 game can play and will play every Xbox 360 Title released now and in the future: Yes or No?
Every midrange box can play every windows game released now and in the future: Yes or No?
If we only include price out the door, lets say C0D4, which one is more expensive. Not how much it costs you 6 years from now, only how much out the door. No monitor, No TV, No 3 controllers, No extra cables. You have nothing but a Monitor or TV and you want to play C0D4: Xbox 360 or PC? I already ran the numbers for 6 years showing replacing the console twice at an estimate 300$ per console and it was still less.
If the Xbox 360 allows people to play similar games that are on the PC, why the hate? What does it matter to you? Buyers Remorse? I could care less what people buy, I have both a PC and Xbox 360, but the argument I have is price. Not performance, not resolution, not graphics, not I get X for free. It's price. How much does playing a game cost out of pocket to play.
Every person that argues a console runs like crap and argues over features does not own both, as you stated. I'm not saying everyone should own an xbox 360, nor am I saying everyone that has an Xbox 360 should own a PC. What I consider a usefull feature, can also be considered a constraint by another person. It's up to the person to depend on what "they" get for the most from an expense. However, people are arguing PC Gaming as a cheaper sport compared to a console. That logic I have a problem with.
It just looks silly when people try to compare prices and what I have seen so far is someone comparing 3X Controller at MSRP prices (and used now prices for pc parts and shouldn't this be optional? Not many pc games you can play on the same system at the same time and I'm not charging 3X computers so your friends can play at your expense), 300$ in disposable batteries (Obviously they didn't know there was a charge/play pack for 13$ off of amazon), and later started including bundled games (grid where as the xbox occasionally bundles games as well). The point is if you need to start resorting to these numbers your "reaching". It's about as "reaching" if I included the power savings of the 175 watt xbox 360 comparing to a gaming rig over 6 years. I can't even read that and not get a laugh.
The point is I'm not a pc gamer for price, I find it a great value. I also find the xbox a great value. I confident the majority of people that argue it's cheaper to pc game are the same people that upgrade at least every other generation, myself included. I will continue to be a pc gamer but at the same time I realize why others are choosing xbox, as much as many of my friends, it's the cheapest price out of pocket and for the forseable future to play every up coming game on that generation.
The original poster asked if he would see a difference migrating to a pc with a HD4870x2 from an Xbox 360. Obviously price is no object here and yes he will see a difference. I'm not arguing the fact. The point is the thread derailed into a Console cost more than a PC to game with. Short term, long term, one is cheaper. I'm not saying one looks better, just one in cheaper.
Either case I don't think I have the problem understanding this point and you don't believe you have a problem either. Nobody can win in this situation and I'll leave the thread.
Why the requirement that the PC play DX 10 titles? If you are going to require that, then I'll require the 360 also play DX 10 titles, in which case PCs will win by default.
Oh, and for your information, that system was/is running Vista.
I'm sorry, but that is an incredibly unlikely (and stupid) fringe case. Who the hell has a monitor but no computer? Seriously, dude. Let me break it down ONE. MORE. TIME. Try to follow along, please.
ASSUMPTIONS:
Person owns (1) TV with required inputs.
Person owns (1) Budget PC or better
(both are statistically true)
Situation:
For said person to game, they must buy either a CONSOLE ($200-600) or a GRAPHICS CARD ($50-600) ($50 is the cheapest card that is more powerful/keeps up with the consoles in question - the 8600GT, which is DX10).
In said situation (which is again, is the most likely situation), buying a graphics card is the cheaper of the two. You really cannot argue with that point unless you create a new set of assumptions, which will NOT be the most likely case. Since it isn't the most likely case, there is no point in debating it.
I don't give a damn if you prefer an Xbox 360 or PS3 over a PC. Really, truly, I couldn't care less. My only point, my ENTIRE POINT, is that the claim that consoles are cheaper than PCs for gaming is, a majority of the time, FALSE. That's it, nothing more. There is no hidden meanings, I'm not trying to bash consoles (hell, I own one, a wii, and play on my friends 360 all the time), I'm not claiming PCs are superior, just that, in a majority of cases, PC gaming is the cheaper of the two.
I never included cost of controllers, or batteries. Nor did I ever factor in bundled games (this is just an example where you fail at reading comprehension - I used that to try and show why sales don't apply here, clearly you missed that point as this is now the second time you've brought that back up)
I consistently stuck only to the base costs to prove my point. Hell, I even made good on your demand for a 3+ year old system that can still play modern games (your response was a childish "but it doesn't do DX10" nonsense)
ugh, not this again.
They both have their advantages and disadvantages.
Graphics depends, sometimes they're the same, sometimes the PC is better.
On another note, how is PC gaming cheaper? Can you find a PC for $300 that's going to play the latest games?
They both have their advantages and disadvantages.
Graphics depends, sometimes they're the same, sometimes the PC is better.
On another note, how is PC gaming cheaper? Can you find a PC for $300 that's going to play the latest games?
The PC always wins in the visual department. It will at least have the advantage of higher resolution, AA, and AF.
Read the damn thread (in its entirety), THEN post. That is how these forum things are supposed to work. If you did actually read the thread, then ask a specific question about what I (or others) have said. I already stated several times now very clearly how PC gaming is cheaper.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,314
This was covered earlier in the thread.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2004
- Messages
- 4,975
Interesting thread.
I used to have a fairly high end PC, talking like 2 HD4850's in crossfire and a E6750 @ 3.6GHz. I recently sold the HD4850's in favor of an Xbox 360. Why? All of my friends have 360's now, I would rather play with them over playing by myself on my PC. All of my friends used to be high end PC gamers, we used to have LAN parties all the time. Now we have all switched to 360's. Why? Well I think it comes down to ease of use and not having to worry about whether or not your PC is going to be able to run that new game that just came out, which also came out on the 360 as well (growing trend). That last part was the killer for me as far as PC gaming. I will gladly sacrifice some graphics quality over just being able to basically plug and play.
The other issue with PC gaming is there really isn't much coming out for it that is not coming out on the Xbox 360. At least nothing I am interested in. RTS's and MMORPG's do not really interest me.
I used to have a fairly high end PC, talking like 2 HD4850's in crossfire and a E6750 @ 3.6GHz. I recently sold the HD4850's in favor of an Xbox 360. Why? All of my friends have 360's now, I would rather play with them over playing by myself on my PC. All of my friends used to be high end PC gamers, we used to have LAN parties all the time. Now we have all switched to 360's. Why? Well I think it comes down to ease of use and not having to worry about whether or not your PC is going to be able to run that new game that just came out, which also came out on the 360 as well (growing trend). That last part was the killer for me as far as PC gaming. I will gladly sacrifice some graphics quality over just being able to basically plug and play.
The other issue with PC gaming is there really isn't much coming out for it that is not coming out on the Xbox 360. At least nothing I am interested in. RTS's and MMORPG's do not really interest me.
Pearl4games
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2008
- Messages
- 7
Its amazing how a few console trolls mix with pc trolls and make a 5 page post on how they both know nothing...
If you want to know the truth of the cost and who is better and so on. Price it your self from the ground up. Consoles will be semi cheaper hardware but the games and the online play cost a lot more then PC games and online play. Steam and a good set of games cost so much less then the same group of console game and the console cost of playing those console games on line that its not even worth comparing. The console is the so easy to set up that idiots can do it. PCs take some time and a diagram to setup. And as we all know no HD TV console setup will beat a 22" wide-screen PC setup.
So its like the old saying. You can have Performance, low cost, quality, and reliability but you can only choose 3 of them. Im not going to use a false dichotomy to say that console is this or that or PC has this or that... You guys do that enough to drive any one crazy that tries to read this.
If you want a real debate then NAME the PC and NAME the console you are wanting to compare. Include the online cost if your including games that can be played online. And add TV cost if you want to add the monitor into the PC cost. Its just that simple. If you dont name the pc and console we could make up prices and go off left and right of the real issue all day...
If you want to know the truth of the cost and who is better and so on. Price it your self from the ground up. Consoles will be semi cheaper hardware but the games and the online play cost a lot more then PC games and online play. Steam and a good set of games cost so much less then the same group of console game and the console cost of playing those console games on line that its not even worth comparing. The console is the so easy to set up that idiots can do it. PCs take some time and a diagram to setup. And as we all know no HD TV console setup will beat a 22" wide-screen PC setup.
So its like the old saying. You can have Performance, low cost, quality, and reliability but you can only choose 3 of them. Im not going to use a false dichotomy to say that console is this or that or PC has this or that... You guys do that enough to drive any one crazy that tries to read this.
If you want a real debate then NAME the PC and NAME the console you are wanting to compare. Include the online cost if your including games that can be played online. And add TV cost if you want to add the monitor into the PC cost. Its just that simple. If you dont name the pc and console we could make up prices and go off left and right of the real issue all day...
kumquatsrus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,326
um, an hdtv can do native 1080p res. vs. 1680*1050 on a 22". even a 24" 1920*1200 res. has only 10% more pixels than a 1080p hdtv. so basically only a 30" monitor will have a much better 4mp res. i would keep my 40" 1080p monitor over a 22" pc monitor any day.
Why so you can play upscaled 480p games with image tearing?
Anyhow there is nothing to stop you pluggin your pc into your HD TV...
Are you kidding? I'd rather play on a big 720p HDTV than even a decent TN 24" monitor, and for the cost of a good IPS or PVA 24" you could buy a decent 32" 1080p HDTV which is waaaay better looking than a PC monitor.
Xbox 360 has impressive graphics...the best I've seen on a console. That's why i bought one. I could see someone being perfectly happy with a xbox 360 and a laptop on the side. In all honesty you can have the same fun gaming experience on a console than you can with a desktop. Visually speaking, a nice rig with a 4870x2 in it looks a lot better than a 360....there is no comparison. I've had my xbox and my pc running cod4, so I know the difference. But in general game play and fun factor, you aren't missing a beat. In the end it's all just pretty rendered textures that really shouldn't dictate the fun in a game to begin with.
My argument for the pc would be that if your going to have a desktop, you might as well make a descent set up. Plus a PC is more versatile and can replace a lot of other electronics. I can act as a juke box, video editor, gaming system, dvd player/cd player, blu-ray player, video recorder, tv tuner, etc. A pc can replace your basic home theater system if you think about it.
My argument for the pc would be that if your going to have a desktop, you might as well make a descent set up. Plus a PC is more versatile and can replace a lot of other electronics. I can act as a juke box, video editor, gaming system, dvd player/cd player, blu-ray player, video recorder, tv tuner, etc. A pc can replace your basic home theater system if you think about it.
What about the fact that you can only play 8v8 and the inevitable lag that plagues the game due to there being no dedicated servers...
The discussion about monitor versus a TV is moot. You can hookup a console to most modern monitors and you can hookup a PC to most modern televisions.
My PC is hooked up to my 1080P Panasonic television for example, and I'm typing on it right now.
Why do I like the PC for gaming?
1) My PC is a HTPC. It has two TV tuner cards on it, and Vista has an excellent media center built right in (the best I've used to date). It can play both bluray and hddvd, and it has 2TB of storage for TV series and movies and tons of music videos or just plain MP3s.
2) My PC runs Orb which allows me to broadcast all my media and television and the like to wherever I am. I can watch something I recorded on TV last week at work on my lunch break.
3) My PC has an internet connection for emails, chatting on trillian, torrents, checking traffic, my sidebar has three traffic cams of the highway outside my neighborhood and traffic overview of the city, a proper full browser, and so forth and w/ 8GB of RAM (which now only runs you $100) and a Q6600 (now only $170 shipped from Newegg), you can do 100 things at once and not worry.
4) Its a fully functional computer, which means I can edit my families videos in Adobe Premiere or mess w/ Photoshop and do my expenses and work or whatever. Its a real computer.
Now I already have a case, harddrives, RAM, powersupply, CPU and so forth for all that other stuff one way or another. Period.
The only thing needed to add PC gaming functionality to it is a video card.
Thats it.
I could set a PS3 or XBox right next to that HTPC that I use for 100 other things anyway, but I think its obvious by now that thats pretty damn redundant on 99% of the console's inferior components. For the price of a PS3, I can simply put in a powerful 3D card that is many generations more advanced and one HECK of a lot more powerful. Afterall, the PS3 essentially has the graphical power of a Nvidia Geforce 7950. That was impressive when the PS3 came out, but for the money now.... its a joke. And thats not all... the PC is now not only more powerful for less money (since I need a good computer anyway), but it can do more:
1) Games can be modified. You should see how many mods I have on my Elder Scrolls Oblivion... looks nothing like the original.
2) I have a far greater array of peripherals at my disposal. I have head tracking called TrackIR4 Pro for looking around the cockpit in aerial or racing games, I have my Wiimotes hooked up for HalfLife (bluetooth), I have a yolk and pedals and power levers for flying, and I have a forcefeedback steering wheel and pedals for racing games and a forcefeedback joystick (although I don't use it much anymore) along with a full wireless keyboard and mouse, and you can hookup 360 controllers to your computer too if so inclined.
PC gaming for people that want a good PC anyway and are familiar with computer hardware (pretty much anyone on this forum) is a no-brainer.
My PC is hooked up to my 1080P Panasonic television for example, and I'm typing on it right now.
Why do I like the PC for gaming?
1) My PC is a HTPC. It has two TV tuner cards on it, and Vista has an excellent media center built right in (the best I've used to date). It can play both bluray and hddvd, and it has 2TB of storage for TV series and movies and tons of music videos or just plain MP3s.
2) My PC runs Orb which allows me to broadcast all my media and television and the like to wherever I am. I can watch something I recorded on TV last week at work on my lunch break.
3) My PC has an internet connection for emails, chatting on trillian, torrents, checking traffic, my sidebar has three traffic cams of the highway outside my neighborhood and traffic overview of the city, a proper full browser, and so forth and w/ 8GB of RAM (which now only runs you $100) and a Q6600 (now only $170 shipped from Newegg), you can do 100 things at once and not worry.
4) Its a fully functional computer, which means I can edit my families videos in Adobe Premiere or mess w/ Photoshop and do my expenses and work or whatever. Its a real computer.
Now I already have a case, harddrives, RAM, powersupply, CPU and so forth for all that other stuff one way or another. Period.
The only thing needed to add PC gaming functionality to it is a video card.
Thats it.
I could set a PS3 or XBox right next to that HTPC that I use for 100 other things anyway, but I think its obvious by now that thats pretty damn redundant on 99% of the console's inferior components. For the price of a PS3, I can simply put in a powerful 3D card that is many generations more advanced and one HECK of a lot more powerful. Afterall, the PS3 essentially has the graphical power of a Nvidia Geforce 7950. That was impressive when the PS3 came out, but for the money now.... its a joke. And thats not all... the PC is now not only more powerful for less money (since I need a good computer anyway), but it can do more:
1) Games can be modified. You should see how many mods I have on my Elder Scrolls Oblivion... looks nothing like the original.
2) I have a far greater array of peripherals at my disposal. I have head tracking called TrackIR4 Pro for looking around the cockpit in aerial or racing games, I have my Wiimotes hooked up for HalfLife (bluetooth), I have a yolk and pedals and power levers for flying, and I have a forcefeedback steering wheel and pedals for racing games and a forcefeedback joystick (although I don't use it much anymore) along with a full wireless keyboard and mouse, and you can hookup 360 controllers to your computer too if so inclined.
PC gaming for people that want a good PC anyway and are familiar with computer hardware (pretty much anyone on this forum) is a no-brainer.
Yeah but the games look like shit because they're upscaled. Think you're missing the point a bit.
Pearl4games
n00b
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2008
- Messages
- 7
Why do you guys bicker about made up opinion that no one cares about? Really... You love beating it to the wide screen LCD monitor while the other rocks them selfs over the HD TV. Its a mute point that no one here cares about...
It seems you guys can say a lot but lets get some side by side pictures of a game like oh... COD4 on a amazing computer connected to a Dell 30" OMG LCD monitor and then COD4 on each console on the same monitor. And then do all that stuff the same on a 30" OMG HD TV ( or what ever comparable size. )
The pictures will speak for them selfs. I do believe that the pc and monitor will be better looking but I could be wrong. And dont go all shitty saying oh the PC cost more because we could go with an old old game and an old PC and get the same result. Using a new game just shows the limits of quality we have today.
It seems you guys can say a lot but lets get some side by side pictures of a game like oh... COD4 on a amazing computer connected to a Dell 30" OMG LCD monitor and then COD4 on each console on the same monitor. And then do all that stuff the same on a 30" OMG HD TV ( or what ever comparable size. )
The pictures will speak for them selfs. I do believe that the pc and monitor will be better looking but I could be wrong. And dont go all shitty saying oh the PC cost more because we could go with an old old game and an old PC and get the same result. Using a new game just shows the limits of quality we have today.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,314
Who are you, God?
kumquatsrus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,326
lol, i have my pc w/8800gt sli setup and all my consoles displayed on a 40" 1080p lcd hdtv via my avr (w/ no image tearing), and they all look awesome on it. furthermore, my onkyo tx-sr875 avr has the silicon optix reon processor that upconverts 480i/480p/720p/1080i signals to 1080p via hdmi, and it is much improved. so i much prefer this tv over any 22" pc monitor (most of which have poorer contrast and color reproduction), thanks.
Monitors offer far superior quality than TVs do. The only reason you think your TV looks better is that you sit farther back from it (or your monitor is of poor quality). Distance makes a *HUGE* difference in perceived quality. Upconverting can never achieve the same quality as a high res imagine. A PC putting out a 1920x1080 image will always have superior quality than any image that is upconverted to 1080p (such as those from consoles).
kumquatsrus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,326
i beg to differ. since i am talking about lcd hdtvs here, it all depends on the panel (ips, s-pva, tn, etc.) so to speak in generalities by saying monitors offer far superior quality than tvs is misleading at best. i own a pc monitor along with an lcd hdtv, so i can easily compare. and i don't sit far away from the tv. sometimes i do at 6-8ft, sometimes i sit at 2ft away. yes, i am familiar with the human eye and the varying distances at which it can resolve different resolutions. so i don't see a problem with upconverting a signal if i'm not going to notice the difference unless viewing at a few ft away. of course, these older/current consoles aren't going to have better image quality since they aren't designed to run at high resolutions. but my deal was with the guy saying the hdtv console setup wouldn't compare to the 22" pc monitor setup. all else being equal, most people aren't going to notice a difference playing a game at 720p upconverted to 1080p on a larger hdtv at 8ft vs playing the same game on a 22" pc monitor at 2ft. in that regard, i will take a larger hdtv everytime, given i have the option to pc game on it as well. so with all due respect, a 22" monitor can suck it. only a 30" 4MP monitor can look better, but i much prefer a larger screen, considering i watch tv and movies as well, which 4MPs would be wasted on - not to mention the substantial costs of getting better pc hardware to power such a resolution in a satisfactory manner for me.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,314
Have you seen a Plasma?
Nope. Games like AC were basically identical.
Whatever the reason was it had to be bull. Whatever way you slice it console gaming is cheaper, factor in TVs, joysticks, whatever you will it's still cheaper.
Pc visuals on a rig with a $300 video card and up is going to be better, and that's the fact of the matter, end of discussion there. Xbox 360 appeals to a different crowd that probably have a more sensible computer for mundane tasks like email, paying bills online, etc., and then they switch to the 360 for gaming.
People that buy/build a "high end" rig probably have more use for a computer in general, and like computer games more than console games. Xbox 360 is priced nicely though. But really, the rig in my sig cost roughly $1300 to build, and I have a quad core...and the absolute best single video card out there, the one and only 4870x2. You'll save a lot building your own rig. You could probably find a desktop at best buy for $1300 that won't even come close to my set up. Plus I won't get gouged when I want to add more hard drive space...not that I need more than 500gb any ways. However I'm pretty sure I am getting gouged on video card prices. I really think video card pricing needs to drop dramatically so that pc gaming in general will attract more users. Everything else is pretty cheap now...memory...psus...processors...it's just the video card prices that are inflated IMO.
People that buy/build a "high end" rig probably have more use for a computer in general, and like computer games more than console games. Xbox 360 is priced nicely though. But really, the rig in my sig cost roughly $1300 to build, and I have a quad core...and the absolute best single video card out there, the one and only 4870x2. You'll save a lot building your own rig. You could probably find a desktop at best buy for $1300 that won't even come close to my set up. Plus I won't get gouged when I want to add more hard drive space...not that I need more than 500gb any ways. However I'm pretty sure I am getting gouged on video card prices. I really think video card pricing needs to drop dramatically so that pc gaming in general will attract more users. Everything else is pretty cheap now...memory...psus...processors...it's just the video card prices that are inflated IMO.
Having a high end rig myself and a 360 I'll have to respectfully disagree with that comment. I tried to give PC gaming a go, but I'm struggling to find any use for this PC, there's just not as many good games on the PC compared to the consoles. Especially for people like myself who are mainly into sports and/or online games.
The visuals with an HDMI 360 on a nice TV vs a PC is sometimes a nonissue. Like I said earlier though it depends on the game.
kumquatsrus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,326
+1 definitely, how about a 9th gen kuro for that matter? or on the lcd side, led-backlit lcds like the samsung a950.
btw, this thread has gone off the road, so i'm just going with the flow, lol
Higher resolution, AA, and AF will tip the IQ in favor of PCs. Even if the game textures, models, etc.. are all the same on both platforms, AA + AF + higher resolution means the PC will come out on top. Just the way it is.
I'm not going to re-iterate my point for the fifth time. Believe whatever you want, its fine by me. I don't have to live in your fairy tale world.
Yeah, have you seen one after ~3 years?
I agree, pc does have a lack of titles in general, and doesn't really have any distinction in the games department....aside from MMO RPGs, flight simulator games, and stragety type games. Problem with those games is that they aren't mainstream titles that the majority will play. This is why the 360 is a lot more appealing...they have all the games that people want to play, and the impressive visuals to go along with it.
Don't you get massive input lag? The Reon on the 875 (905 for me) causes so much input lag I can actually hear the echo if I turn my TV speakers on. I bought an active splitter to bypass the receiver for gaming. It rocks for tv and movies though.
kumquatsrus
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,326
i think i did awhile back, particularly with music/rhythm/karaoke stuff, but i made some adjustments in the menu settings of the avr + tv and it's been working great for several months with no audio/input delay on my games. not sure what i did though, since i had to plod through that massive manual that it came with. i'm pretty sure it had to do with the hdmi audio processing through the avr at default settings that needed to be configured. i think at the avsforum, there were similar issues posted as well, with some solutions provided, but i can't recall. the threads (875/905) were both very long though. what version firmware are you using?
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,314
Why whats your experience.
I havent read about any issues with Plasmas looking bad unless they have done enough hours to warrant their end of life.
Modern Plasmas have a 100,000hr half life, thats over 11 years left on permanently.
Its not an issue any more.
Outamyhead
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
- Messages
- 4,263
PC's are way ahead of the latest console's capabilities, unfortunately besides Crysis, there hasn't been anything that will show what PC's can truly do with graphics.