Console Gaming Vs Pc Gaming : Round 2 !

[Bluffmaster]

Well you absolutely cannot compare the hardware of a PC with the CONSOLES ! A PC is multipurpous , but a console is used only and only for gaming ! Do you know the hardware specs of PS2 ? Its uses only 32 mb ram ! Yet you can see so many titles which can easily put the best of PC TO SHAME !

 

[Params7]

The most popular PC titles are multi-platformed because PCs are an open market constantly revolutionalizing the gaming industry unlike the closed console market with nothing but exclusivity deals to hold on to.

Dude that is SO WRONG! The most popular PC titles? Since when have you started caring about what the people like. Only exclusive PC game that made it to top 10 is FEAR
http://www.gamespot.com/pages/features/bestof2005/index.php?day=6&page=1

You call games like Fear and Farcry revolutionizing?? BLuffmaster has a good point, if manula aim is so bad, how come there is not one award ceremony held in 2004 that has not named Resident Evil 4 as game of the year? Everybo dy agreed it was one of the most revolutionizing action game. Jeez, try and read this, and don't misconcept Popular with average.

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/features/bestof2005/index.php?day=6&page=1

Resident Evil 4 is a masterpiece, representing the pinnacle of quality that video games have ever achieved in virtually every respect. It's a challenging, complex, visually stunning game that keeps you surprised, terrified, and thrilled for hour after memorable hour and then offers plenty of good reasons for you to keep coming back for more. The fact that for the entire remainder of the year scarcely any other 2005 action game even approached its standards just goes to show how far ahead of its time this game really is. And beyond how much outstanding fun this game has to offer, it was also just a breath of fresh air--a reminder that long-running video game series can and should take some risks in order to stay on top and that sequels to games can sometimes greatly surpass their predecessors' standards rather than merely try to live up to them.

i feel like a fool talking about Re4 like that every single time but your thick head never grasps the situation in the gaming world.

console market with nothing but exclusivity deals to hold on
to.

That's nothing but exclusive deal for ya'.

Let those who can't handle PC gaming buy consoles, and those who want the better experience and quality can stick to PCs.

That tells how much you want some of the exclusives on the consoles. Better Experience and Quality - Not from consoles but from PC? Your opinion.
And your opinion =/ Fact.

which is clearly the superior platform.

PC is? If PC was superior - Why hasn't ONE console exclusive gone to PC? Why is month after month the opposite is happening. Why PC is loosing all its exclusives? Developers. They see the market on consoles and don't give 2 cents if it will graphically weak. Clearly consoles have been the superior for developers and customers with superior games like MGS3, God of War and Resident Evil 4 - No PC game touched these 3 as much as you hate to boast about the record breaking eyecandy feat of Farcry 100 years ago.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=2255

Give up, this actually isn't fun anymore and eating up my time.

 

[KingKrool]

he current triple core x360 is slower than an athlon 64 3000+ even after using all the available cores

Care to elaborate? Each core on the 360 is a variation on the PPC, so I wonder how much slower it could be. Besides, from what I have heard, the current games only use one core.

 

[Params7]

taking launch titles as the max capabilities of the next gen already. X360 hasnt even started yet.

Here's a little *just an exclsive deal* from consoles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil_4#Awards_.26_Recognition

* 2004 IGN Best of E3 Awards GameCube Best Action Game

* 2004 IGN Best of E3 Awards GameCube Best Graphics

* 2004 IGN Best of E3 Awards GameCube Best Sound

* 2004 IGN Best of E3 Awards GameCube Technological Excellence

* 2004 IGN Best of E3 Awards GameCube Game of the Show

* 2004 IGN Best of E3 Awards Technological Excellence

* 2005 CESA Game Awards - Prize of Excellence

* 2005 Spike TV's Video Game Awards - Best Graphics

* 2005 Spike TV's Video Game Awards - Game of the Year (Note: This award was apparently only given to the Playstation 2 version, as the program never acknowledged of the existence of the GameCube version)

* 2005 Game Informer's Year in Review - Game of the Year

* 2005 IGN GameCube Game of the Year

* 2005 IGN Best of 2005 GameCube Best Action Game

* 2005 IGN Best of 2005 GameCube Best Graphics Technology

* 2005 IGN Best of 2005 GameCube Best Artistic Design

* 2005 IGN Best of 2005 GameCube Best Original Score

* 2005 IGN Best of 2005 GameCube Best Use of Sound

* 2005 Golden Joystick Awards - GameCube Game of the Year

* 2005 Golden Joystick Awards - Editor's Game of the Year

* 2005 GameSpot Best of 2005 Best Action Adventure Game

* 2005 GameSpot Best of 2005 - Most Improved Sequel

* 2005 GameSpot Best of 2005 - Game of the Year 2005

* 2005 GameSpy Best GameCube Action Title of 2005

* 2005 GameSpy GameCube Game of the Year

* 2005 Edge magazine Awards Best Game Of 2005

* Telewest Shiny Awards Games Digest Game Of The Year 2005

That's just Re4 alone.

So, FPS and aiming on consoles suck, Huh :huh:

Well, we can clearly see how critics hate it above.

Sure, one PC exclusive that could've at least equaled half that list is Half Life 2. But it doean't count, consoles have them too.

hitting features PC got is Graphics and Raw Power to run them at,

Which, for the last time, does not equal a better game

 

[greyhawk84]

a pc with tailor-made(hardware specific/application specific) OS.would be 10000 times better(performance wise/quality wise/shelf-life wise) than consoles. but unfortunately thats not going to happen..

 

[saumilsingh]

Give up, this actually isn't fun anymore and eating up my time.

Then don't reply, nobody's forcing you duh.
Better spend your time PM'ing scrizer or getting beat up by a football team or something. Don't forget to make a thread telling us all about it...

For all the awards RE4 might have received, I still don't think it was any special. Good yes, but hardly groundbreaking. It was just another game.
Fear and Farcry weren't revolutionary either (except for the graphics).

No game released in the last year was revolutionary on any platform except for Fahrenheit.
Sorry but my standards are just way higher, GTA3 surely impressed me once, VC and SA did absolutely nothing.

If you haven't realised it yet, I don't dislike console games, I just dislike the consoles themselves.
So stop talking about the games (which are equally good on both platforms) and start talking about how a console is actually better than a PC. Is it the crap graphics or the complete lack of online capabilities?

Cheap & Maintainence Free is all good but a Toyota simply can't hold a candle to an Impreza.

That tells how much you want some of the exclusives on the consoles.

I own a good enough PC and a PS2. Enjoying the best of both worlds allows me to decide better which is infact the best suited to play all the same games.
Can't say the same for you on the other hand, so you might wanna reconsider as to who's doing all the wishing...

And if you think console exclusives not going over to PCs is an indicator of anything, you're just ignorant.
Unlike the console market, the PC market isn't controlled by anyone. There's no single party present to market, promote and represent everything and there's no money to be raked in by any single party.
In the case of a PS2, Sony can actualy keep its' games from going over to PCs by signing exclusivity deals and Sony will make it very profitable for the game developer to do so.
Who do you think will represent an open scenario like PC gaming and make it worthwhile for any particular developer to stick to developing solely for PCs?
And I don't think it needs to be that way anyway as common sense would dictate.

Exclusivity deals aren't an indicator of anything and aren't of any benefit to the consumer who should be free to chose whatever he wants (unless you disagree what an even more awesome game GT4 could be combined with cutting edge graphics, infinite usermade cars/mods and free for all internet play).

Care to elaborate? Each core on the 360 is a variation on the PPC, so I wonder how much slower it could be. Besides, from what I have heard, the current games only use one core.

Something from Carmack on nex-gen consoles...

They can quote these incredibly high numbers of giga-flop or tera-flops or whatever, but in reality, when you do a straighforward development process on them, they’re significantly slower than a modern high end PC.

And it's been already proven, Quake4 (only a current-gen title at that) on the nex-gen X360 looks significantly worse and runs much slower than on a current-gen PC.

 

[Haste]

Care to elaborate? Each core on the 360 is a variation on the PPC, so I wonder how much slower it could be. Besides, from what I have heard, the current games only use one core.

Here this article makes an interesting read:
http://www.megagames.com/news/html/hardware/next-genconsoles-therealdeal.shtml

And yeah you're right, this article also suggests that new games also primarily use only one core as most of the processing is done in main thread, but this may change after 3-4 years.

 

[KingKrool]

Originally Posted by John Carmack

They can quote these incredibly high numbers of giga-flop or tera-flops or whatever, but in reality, when you do a straighforward development process on them, they’re significantly slower than a modern high end PC.

If you think that a quote from a developer who has all along developed for the PC (and hardly ever consoles) is going to buttress your point, think again. Granted, he may be a great game dev, but he is probaby a bit biased by the fact that, well, his games run on the PC (and have never done much on the console market).

And I wonder how long JC will think that way. From what we hear, OpenGL (JC's lifeblood) will not perform so well on Vista, thanks to WGF. Now, I wonder how his games will keep up with the competitions.

Of course, you might suddenly jump up and scream at me for saying not so good things about Id software. Well here is my take on Id software - their games suck. No gameplay - just graphics, sounds and fancy engines. So I have little respect for his opinion anyway.

Again, we haven't seen the PS3 yet. Though I have no doubt that JC will be proven right there. The key is "straightforward development process". MS and Sony will have a hard time making good and easy development utilities - especially Sony, considering the almost excessive use of vector units. Till date, no one has been able to make autovectorizing compilers for general purpose microchips (that includes the PPC cores in the new consoles, and the run of the mill x86). The /arch=SSE2 (I hope that is it? Chaos can probably correct me here) switches in Visual studio and similar in GCC don't count - they just replace some regular x87 floating point instructions with SIMD. I wonder how the hell they will do anything with the Cell.

 

[saumilsingh]

Yeah but when it's Carmack himself, you've to atleast give him the benefit of the doubt.
And he has been developing for consoles since forever - Wolf, Doom, Quake2, Quake3, Doom3, Quake4 are all available on consoles ranging from the SNES to PSX, N64, DC, PS2 and X360. He even codes for mobile platforms.
Rest assured he knows his stuff...

As for sticking to OGL, I don't think that's anything more than a preference, everyone has one. I highly doubt he can't work with D3D just as well, same for every other coder.

I just like Carmacks' engines and rightly so. id is known for their engines first of all, the games are meh to say the least (all the Quakes survived only because of the great multiplayer).
He doesn't have anything to do with game design itself and one can't discredit his opinion on hardware based on bad gameplay design on someone elses' part.
Contrary to popular belief, Carmack != id software.

I myself got bored of Doom3 halfway through just like everyone else but I also don't ignore the fact that D3Tech is a feat of technical excellence just like all his other engines.
And that's why you have to respect his opinion atleast in matters related to graphics and GPU technology (megatexture uploads 6GB worth of 32,000x32,000 textures into a mere 8MB of video memory, don't tell me you can't take this guy at face value).

 

[Aditya]

Few things...

FPS Games > PC
Racing Games > Console / PC (w/ a wheel) so Console wins this..
RPG > PC
Strategy > PC
TPS > Console/PC (on par)

I feel a console is only useful for Racing Games, than anything.
I cant see a the Console Market making as much money as the PC Market (talking of the Games ofcourse).

 

[Bluffmaster]

I feel a console is only useful for Racing Games, than anything.
I cant see a the Console Market making as much money as the PC Market (talking of the Games ofcourse).

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: HA HA HA HA HA......... Now Thats a Joke of the century ! :rofl:

 

[Bluffmaster]

Xbox 360 and PS3: death to PC gaming !

Ever since Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo officially unveiled their next-gen consoles a few weeks ago at E3, I've been getting a steady stream of e-mail and instant messages asking me which one I think will be the best. Truth be told, Nintendo's Revolution, which I personally like for its compact size and portability factor alone, is too much of a blank slate, spec-wise, to even warrant consideration. For now, that narrows the debate to Microsoft's Xbox 360 vs. Sony's PlayStation 3.

It's always hard to judge products when you're seeing early versions of them--all of the Xbox 360 games that we saw at E3 ran on dual Apple G5 dev kits, and the PS3 demos we saw were all using who knows what. So I'd be foolish to try to declare a winner at this juncture, even if my gut says it will be the PS3, which, given the extra development time, should be somewhat more powerful. Out of the box, Sony's PS3 offering also seems to boast better connectivity options (two HDMI ports, integrated Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, onboard flash memory card reader), particularly for high-end HDTV owners. The Xbox 360 will use the same "breakout box" model for A/V connectivity and offer an add-on wireless networking module as well. But the fact is, we haven't even gotten pricing for either unit yet. So there's a still lot of jockeying in store for both Microsoft and Sony as we head toward next year's E3, where, in all probability, comparisons will abound when we get to compare all the new games side by side.
Sony's PS3: death knell for PC gaming?What I am willing to predict, however, even at this early stage, is that the real loser in all of this will be PC gaming. Let's start with Quake 4, which uses the "old" Doom 3 engine but still came across as one of the more impressive PC titles I saw at the show. Id, Quake 4's developer, was also showing an Xbox 360 version of the same game behind closed doors, and those reporters I polled at the show confirmed what I thought: they really couldn't discern any difference between the two versions.

Granted, Nvidia and ATI will eventually put out more powerful graphics cards that trump what's inside the PS3 and the Xbox 360, but the price-performance ratio, at least over the next couple of years, heavily favors the next-gen consoles. A true powerhouse PC costs much more than $2,000, and while we don't have pricing yet for the Xbox 360 or the PS3, I think it's safe to assume both will cost less than $500 and probably less than $400. In fact, chances are good that the Xbox 360 will be priced at less than $300 by the time the PS3 hits stores sometime around May or June 2006, assuming they stay on schedule. One could even envision a bare-bones 360 (sans removable hard drive) going for less than $250. The bottom line is that console manufacturers often heavily subsidize their new machines, swallowing huge losses up front in hopes that they'll make it all back selling games. (Unlike PC games, the console manufacturers get a royalty for each game sold on their respective systems.) Other things being equal, the DIY-heavy PC-gaming industry can't hope to compete in that kind of market.

If you buy the hype, the PS3's Cell processor--combined with an Nvidia-based RSX graphics processor--will offer stronger graphical performance than just about anything you can get in a current gaming PC. That means you're getting a whole system for less than what it would cost to buy a cutting-edge, high-end graphics card. But you don't have to take my word for it or even Sony's: the claim that the PS3 will offer the equivalent graphics performance of two GeForce 6800 Ultra cards working in tandem came from Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO of Nvidia. Current cost of those cards: about $500 each. Cost of Alienware's Aurora ALX SLI, which incorporates a dual 6800 Ultra configuration: nearly $5,000. And how many consumers are willing to pay hundreds extra for PC graphics cards that the manufacturer's own CEO admits are inferior? I'll let you do the math.

At E3, the biggest point of contention was whether the Xbox 360, which uses a custom ATI graphics processor, is a full-fledged 2.0 version of the Xbox or actually more of a half-baked 1.5 release that's not a monumental leap forward. Not surprisingly, the folks from Sony were spinning it as a 1.5 product and seemed glad that their message could be distilled into something as succinct and simple as a single number. I have to say, however, that a top-level examination of each console's specs doesn't exactly support the 1.5 argument; both consoles appear to be in roughly the same league. Now, the PS3 may be the Yankees and the Xbox 360 the Seattle Mariners, but they're both major-league consoles capable of competing with major-league PCs--for the time being, anyway.
High-end PC graphics: eclipsed by consoles?When Associate Editor Rich Brown asked the folks from Nvidia about the value proposition of high-end PCs vs. next-gen consoles, he didn't quite get the answer he was looking for. In his E3 PC gaming blog, Rich paraphrased the PR rep as saying that "if next-generation consoles represent the best that Nvidia and ATI can do at the time when those consoles launch, you'll still be able to count on PC hardware surpassing the PS3 and the Xbox 360--within a few years."

A few years? That's all well and good for the folks at Nvidia and ATI, who win whether consumers are buying PCs or consoles, so long as they're buying a lot of them. But it's probably not so good for Intel, which didn't make it into any of the next-gen gaming machines (IBM is supplying CPUs to all three new consoles). Personally, I think that once the Xbox 360 and PS3 come out, instead of looking at high-performance PCs, more people are going to spend that $2,000 or so of discretionary income on a new HDTV, likely one of the flat-panel variety.

At least, that's my plan. What's yours? :hap2:

SOURCE : CNET

 

[archish]

in computers u can play from the latest games to old dos games, can u do that on consoles?

with regular upgrades we get shiny new pc year after year, for a console i have to keep looking at the same box for atleast 3-4 years

PS: Dont flame me for the abov two points I am not a gaming freak

 

[superczar]

I own a good enough PC and a PS2. Enjoying the best of both worlds allows me to decide better which is infact the best suited to play all the same games.
Can't say the same for you on the other hand, so you might wanna reconsider as to who's doing all the wishing...

It's more of a personal thing.....
I personally prefer the PS2 over the PC despite a decently powerful gaming rig just for the fact that it's a simple plug & Play thing with no tweaking/setup time etc involved.....You just switch on the console, slouch on a couch and enjoy the game away to glory

Had I been a student with (sigh!!) more free time on my hand, I perhaps would have preferred the PC (for the exactly popposite fact that it gives me more flexibility in terms of playig around with the settings (gameplay/video/audio etc)

So I guess it's to each one his (or her!!) own poison.....

Thaks to consoles, my dad too enjoys an occasional drive down Motor city in Burnout 3 on a PS2 whenever he comes visitng
On the other hand, my kid cousins (Currently engrossed in Far Cry ) wouldn't be caught dead near a console...
Go Figure :tongue:

 

[Params7]

Then don't reply, nobody's forcing you duh.

WIth you posting that crap everywhere, no.

Better spend your time PM'ing scrizer or getting beat up by a football team or something. Don't forget to make a thread telling us all about it...

Not your problem if i'm more social. Not my problem if you lurk in the shadows. This is a community, not some messed up chat session in Kawabonka. Go fish. anbd Tell the same thing to Sunny when he was injured.

And that was not a football team, they were no-class 'bhai's' of the road, and they jumped in the ground to rag my team and my opponents. About Scrizer, he's sent me another of his well wishes in a PM. What's your problem if i let someone know in a thread about it? Stop spying on my posts and making a fuss on it. There are other you can piss off.

For all the awards RE4 might have received, I still don't think it was any special. Good yes, but hardly groundbreaking. It was just another game.

lol, i'm not surprised. Not only you haven't played it, disagreein with yourself. I'm not forcing you or anyone else to appreciate the game, but to agree with the fact that it was indeed groundbreaking and i've got all reliable critics back that up. Still, its your opinion, opinion on something you haven't even touched.

Is it the crap graphics or the complete lack of online capabilities?

none of those exist in consoles, maybe you're talking about the old Gameboy?

Ps2 and Xbox manage to produced games like Gt4, Halo3, Gow ntm Re4. If that was crap, the world wouldn't have been playing it today plenty more than they did Farcry and...what other exclusive does PC have? ...woops, i forgot Farcry isn't an exclsuive.

And Xbox Live is almost on par with PC's online. Next generation will no freakin' doubt level it.

Need not read anything below since you don't seem to like important market research which does never happens to be in your favour -

4 more years, there will be more people with a ps3 and x360 than a 7800 in India. PC is as dead as it can be in North America and Japan. By next-gen, PC will be out with nothing but a couple of average exclsuives while a console can not only play 90% of game ports released on PC but more, much worthy exclsuives and tons in numbers. If Ps2 in its death years with a walking stick outsell games with quality played on 6800u then Ps3 will crush it.

Oh and Btw, that was a nice find, Bluff. Coming from CNET too.

If PC can't win exclusives and win more customers with ultra performance cutting-edge cards like the 6800u than the most inferior system this generation, there's no telling how much the consoles (or ps3) would sell it if packed two 6800 ultras within the 400$ mark. It doesn't matter if Pc outraces consoles in a years time fact is consoles would have sold so much for the PC to even stand up straight in the mainstream gaming.

 

[Blade_Runner]

Lol i wasn't planning to post but that article is lame. Lame cause everytime a new console is released the impending death of PC gaming is forecasted. So many consoles launches later PC gaming market is stil standing. As a matter of fact 2005 was a great year for PC gamers with AAA titles like Hl2, Farcry, Bf2, FEAR, COD2, Quake 4, etc.

Another thing the guy in the above article is missing is the cost of a HDTV which i am sure most gamers in india won't be able to afford so soon.

Let's start with Quake 4, which uses the "old" Doom 3 engine but still came across as one of the more impressive PC titles I saw at the show. Id, Quake 4's developer, was also showing an Xbox 360 version of the same game behind closed doors, and those reporters I polled at the show confirmed what I thought: they really couldn't discern any difference between the two versions.

Lol every and their dogs know that quake 4 port on the 360 looks like crap !! Dunno what this guy is talking about or is he even qualified to write something like this.

A true powerhouse PC costs much more than $2,000, and while we don't have pricing yet for the Xbox 360 or the PS3, I think it's safe to assume both will cost less than $500 and probably less than $400. In fact, chances are good that the Xbox 360 will be priced at less than $300 by the time the PS3 hits stores sometime around May or June 2006, assuming they stay on schedule.

He forgot to mention the cost of a hdtv. Secondly the availability of the next gen consoles will be bad if not worse mainly due to the hi-specced graphics and cpu chips. The x360s are being sold at insane prices right now. The same suit might follow for the ps3.

Rich paraphrased the PR rep as saying that "if next-generation consoles represent the best that Nvidia and ATI can do at the time when those consoles launch, you'll still be able to count on PC hardware surpassing the PS3 and the Xbox 360--within a few years."

He can forget about years, r580s in crossfire and g71s in SLI will easily surpass both the x360 and ps3 easily. HD gaming has been norm for PC gamer since quite some time. PC gamers have been gaming @ resolutions in excess of 1280 * 1024 since over a year now.

A few years? That's all well and good for the folks at Nvidia and ATI, who win whether consumers are buying PCs or consoles, so long as they're buying a lot of them.

Lol the pc gaming market is bread and butter for both the companies.

 

[Anticlocked]

lets stop using consoles and pcs adn then GFX card company shares will come down which we can buy and then make everyone buy gfx cards and then lets sell shares and make a CSS server

gawd!!not many ppl in india have hdtvs.the sales in India for PS3 and Xbox 360 will be low compared to other regions.for gawds sake not many ppl even knwo that thers a xbox 360 and ps3(i mean like the normal teen/kid or watever),it'll seem like everyone knows bcos we are informed through the net and stuff.the newspaper doesnt even publish much stuff about gaming and stuff.and even if it does its one a small tab.so,i dont think PS3 and xbox360 will flourish in India.

 

[Bluffmaster]

Well then the same implies to Pc gaming , How many in India know about geforce 7800 etc and moreover how many in india can afford a Good Gaming PC ?

 

[Params7]

What the guy meant was a one time investment in a console and hdtv you're all set and ready to go. But PC needs upgrading every 1 or 2 years and it costs just as much as an hadtv the first time you upgrade ntm costs following in future upgrades. Besdies, its an hdtv! You get just more than high res console gaming on it. Say a Ps3+Hdtv seems like an all rounder investment to me because -

1. You don't need upgrading any time after that, its a one time thing. Costing around the same as a high end gaming PC

2. You enjoy just much more than just gaming, HDTV is all set for high def Blu-Ray format movies and games. And HD-DVD. You can watch regualr cable. What else? Now to perfrom that in a PC, you'l need a seperate blu-ray drive and large high res monitor putting more costs.

PC is the most costly format, though i'll agree for the costs included it does pay. For the ravers who are ready to spend that much and plan their upgrades, well good for them, go ahead.

-Edit - What is this place turning into? There are two active pc vs console topics running simultaneously.

 

[saumilsingh]

Exactly you can't hold the price factor against PCs, it all pays back with a much more refined experience. Multiplayer and what not...
And you really don't need a 7800GTX to enjoy PC games with all the eyecandy, it's far more cheaper as long as you know what to buy.

btw you can connect your HDTV to a PC directly to play games.