PCs own Consoles
but if you’ve been reading the latest pc magazines the pc gamers are getting a little nervous with these powerful consoles on the horizon. and its a fact that pc gaming has been on a decline for years now. i think the way to attract more people into the pc gaming world would be to find ways to lower the prices of pc parts.
for the price of one top of the line processor (AMD Athlon64 FX-57…1000$) you could buy a ps3, xbox360 and games to spare. As im on the edge of getting ready to build a new game/lan rig, i hope PCs can get out of the rut.
Kuz have you never been cheated in Halo2 i quit playing that game for about a month(yeah a whole month) due to those damn boosters.
Xbox 360 will be out sooner than PS3 and will probably be cheaper. The PS3 specs are more impressive that the Xbox 360. Since you really haven’t used either one of the previous versions you’re just going to need to pick. I’m awaiting the Xbox 360 only because I currently have an Xbox. If I had a PS2 I’d be awaiting the PS3. Oh and there is the Nintendo too.
[quote]Bauer97 wrote:
lostinthought wrote:
Less filling.
PS3 should kick some major butt. There’s a good thing about the xbox though is that you’ll be able to pick your level of system all the way up to 4 hundred bucks, starting at 2. I have a ps2 and also love the controls…A buddy has the xbox and it seems there’s more people out there to play live with.
I didn’t hear anything about the different price ranges of the PS3, I just heard it’s going to be more expensive and a much longer wait than the Xbox 360, and include a ton of features I really have no desire for, i.e. “a complete home theatre center”, as I read in one Sony press release, which is why it’s going to cost much more. Sony makes some sweet products, but just give me a kick ass game system already, I don’t need it to cook me breakfast and give me a sponge bath too… although that would be awesome…
Where did you hear about the varying price levels, lostinthought?[/quote]
The different levels was in reference to the xbox, not ps3. I read about it in this months Playboy, just got it in the mail two days ago.
[quote]physicsmazz wrote:
Xbox 360 will be out sooner than PS3 and will probably be cheaper. The PS3 specs are more impressive that the Xbox 360. Since you really haven’t used either one of the previous versions you’re just going to need to pick. I’m awaiting the Xbox 360 only because I currently have an Xbox. If I had a PS2 I’d be awaiting the PS3. Oh and there is the Nintendo too.[/quote]
Are official specs for PS3 out now? If you’re talking about what was released at E3, I’d take those numbers with a grain of salt.
Personally, I’d pick the PS3. But agreed, PCs own consules even if the gap has been closing in recent years. Consules can’t compare to in terms of speed…of game play. I used to play Unreal Tournament 2004 on PC all the time. The pace is lightning. I’ve played Halo a few times only to yawn. Its so terribly slow. When I can use 8 fingers of control (5 left, 3 right) on a PC keyboard and mouse versus perhaps 4 in a consule, there’s no contest. I have a Logitech MX510 mouse with perhaps more buttons than an Xbox control. And thats one hand. Now if they would only make some better games for the PCs…
Personally, I’d pick the PS3. But agreed, PCs own consules even if the gap has been closing in recent years. Consules can’t compare to in terms of speed…of game play. I used to play Unreal Tournament 2004 on PC all the time. The pace is lightning. I’ve played Halo a few times only to yawn. Its so terribly slow. When I can use 8 fingers of control (5 left, 3 right) on a PC keyboard and mouse versus perhaps 4 in a consule, there’s no contest. I have a Logitech MX510 mouse with perhaps more buttons than an Xbox control. And thats one hand. Now if they would only make some better games for the PCs…[/quote]
Some games work better on consoles than on PC’s and vice versa. For example, I think most sports games work better on consoles because of the ability to do multiplayer fith friends in person on a large TV. First person shooters OTOH, are far superior on PC’s because of the keyboard-mouse controls. Consoles and PC’s both have their place in the gaming industry.
I say get all the systems if you can afford it. I’ve yet to meet someone that hated every single game for a particular console. I’ll hit up some action on Halo 2 live on xbox, then maybe when I get tired of that I’ll play some God of War on PS2, and after that some one on one with a buddy in Unreal Tournament on PC.
Variety is the spice of life!!!
With that said, I like Playstation consoles and games the best:)
[quote]Panther1015 wrote:
Tank53 wrote:
I found this on a web site though I didnt read the whole thing. Also I dont know if they are trustworthy. Check it out.
Personally, I’d pick the PS3. But agreed, PCs own consules even if the gap has been closing in recent years. Consules can’t compare to in terms of speed…of game play. I used to play Unreal Tournament 2004 on PC all the time. The pace is lightning. I’ve played Halo a few times only to yawn. Its so terribly slow. When I can use 8 fingers of control (5 left, 3 right) on a PC keyboard and mouse versus perhaps 4 in a consule, there’s no contest. I have a Logitech MX510 mouse with perhaps more buttons than an Xbox control. And thats one hand. Now if they would only make some better games for the PCs…
Some games work better on consoles than on PC’s and vice versa. For example, I think most sports games work better on consoles because of the ability to do multiplayer fith friends in person on a large TV. First person shooters OTOH, are far superior on PC’s because of the keyboard-mouse controls. Consoles and PC’s both have their place in the gaming industry.[/quote]
True. I never play sports games on PC or anything else. They don’t do a thing for me. Regardless, you have a point.
If anyone wants a challenge in halo 2, look up that name…granted, its my friends system and game I play on and he lives far away from me, so it might be him instead
I occasionally check out Gamespot for articles, but I’m not really into videogames as much as I used to be. BTW, I’ve seen console keyboard/mouse peripherals before (which I think aren’t worth buying), but not an adapter for using an actual PC keyboard and mouse. That’s pretty cool.
BJ Spliff (bliffert, whatever),
I started this same thread a while ago and got lots of great input. I went out and bought an XBOX and…now it just sits there. It sits there the same way a Playstation would. Fact is, the reason I didn’t have a console was that I’m not that into video games! I thought with all the new shit out it would be different. Nope! Don’t get me wrong, I still enjoy playing Madden or whatever occasionaly when I’m at friend’s houses, but that’s enough for me. Just something to think about before you buy a $200+ DVD player that happens to play video games too!
Sorry not to reply sooner. It has to do with the archetecture of the chip. The Xbox 360 has two general Power PC cores. These are similar to the Apple PPC cores. Anyways, PS3, aka Cell chip, runs one PPC, similar to the Xbox, and 8 special purpose processor units. These SPUs as they are called, get passed work from the general and all the general really does is divy up the work and keep things in sequence. To put it simply, you will have a lot more processor power. The problem is that developers are having to understand how to use the Cell chip. Where the Xbox 360, is similar to what is already out there in dual cores, the PS3 is different. At the beginning, the Xbox mayblow away the PS3 until the programmers get the hang of how to utilize correctly the PS3.
Get a PSP. Not only does it look really slick, its got amazing graphics, and probably best of all… you can play it on the krapper (and just about anywhere else)
Sorry not to reply sooner. It has to do with the archetecture of the chip. The Xbox 360 has two general Power PC cores. These are similar to the Apple PPC cores. Anyways, PS3, aka Cell chip, runs one PPC, similar to the Xbox, and 8 special purpose processor units. These SPUs as they are called, get passed work from the general and all the general really does is divy up the work and keep things in sequence. To put it simply, you will have a lot more processor power. The problem is that developers are having to understand how to use the Cell chip. Where the Xbox 360, is similar to what is already out there in dual cores, the PS3 is different. At the beginning, the Xbox mayblow away the PS3 until the programmers get the hang of how to utilize correctly the PS3.
[/quote]
So basically the PS3 will have distributed processing going, if i gather you correctly. But noone of this matters really, the new consoles will still be limited by the users output device (TV) and they can only achieve so much in graphic resolution. With very low limits on graphic resolution in the games, things like frame rates are not really an issue, so it’s not hard for the games to run smoothly. I’m sure both consoles will be good enough for the console market.
What i see happening is Xbox 360 launching with a big title of it’s own, Perhaps Gears of War, then the hordes of filler and uninspired games will follow. If we’re lucky we may get 2-3 good games on it, but hopefully one groundbreaking one, ala Halo, Doom, Half LIfe, Quake etc…
[quote]Gregus wrote:
So basically the PS3 will have distributed processing going, if i gather you correctly. But noone of this matters really, the new consoles will still be limited by the users output device (TV) and they can only achieve so much in graphic resolution. [/quote]
I disagree. Have you looked at the TV market right now? The new ones, granted $5k or more, are able to double as fully function computer monitors, DLP TVs rock.
[quote]What i see happening is Xbox 360 launching with a big title of it’s own, Perhaps Gears of War, then the hordes of filler and uninspired games will follow. If we’re lucky we may get 2-3 good games on it, but hopefully one groundbreaking one, ala Halo, Doom, Half LIfe, Quake etc…
[/quote]
This I whole heartly agree with. At most, a console will have somewhere between 1-3 great games a year, with 2-5 okay ones, and then filler for the rest. With how long it takes to develop a game, it is hard for me to imagine people taking the time to develop crap. I wonder if the programmers actually play the game when it is done, or if they ship it out and pray.
[quote]BrwnbellyYankee wrote:
Kuz have you never been cheated in Halo2 i quit playing that game for about a month(yeah a whole month) due to those damn boosters.[/quote]
No, I have been (although not quite to the extent I hear is happening these days). Cheating can definitely still happen on XBox, so you make a good point there. I guess my point is that with XBox Live, since Microsoft controls that network, it can also boot off the cheaters better than if you are playing a comparable PC game via the net. I think the guys are Bungie are doing a pretty good job at finding these guys and banning them outright.
[quote]Gregus wrote:
What i see happening is Xbox 360 launching with a big title of it’s own, Perhaps Gears of War, then the hordes of filler and uninspired games will follow. If we’re lucky we may get 2-3 good games on it, but hopefully one groundbreaking one, ala Halo, Doom, Half LIfe, Quake etc…
[/quote]
Geez, I hope that’s not what happens. But in reality, that same fate can and does befall PC’s (i.e. filler games that are just not all that great). I would not say that is a problem inherent with consoles.
I think the big advantage PC games have over consoles (at least for me) is that they really do not have any great strategy games for consoles (which could be inherent in the fact that there is only so much you do with a controller vs. a keyboard and mouse).
In the end its going to be the same thing it has been for 10 years…
The Playstation fans will say that the xbox is teh sux and you NEED to get a PS3.
The xbox fans will say that the Xbox is teh pwnage and you need to get that.
Just check it out, look at the games you want to play and then make your own decision. EVERYONE has a bias (I only play PC for example… mouse + Keyboard is THE BEST)