IMHO I played FFXI when it first launched on a PS2 (my PC at that time was incapable of playing anything new). My wife and I got a second PS2 so we could play together, and those Logitech Netplay controllers (which kick all ass). We had great fun, and the controller worked extremely well for that game. Later on, when we had 2 PCs that seriously EXCEEDED the sys requirements, I got the PC version (hi-res only viable on PC or XBox360) and frankly the control just sucked for PC. We got adapters that let us use the netplay controller on the PC, then we were very happy.
That said, I have no problem with my PC, my mouse and my keyboard. FFXI was the only MMO i've ever played on a console, and frankly I can't complain. Moral of the story is, if a developer really wants to make an mmo viable for console, there is no good reason they cannot. Maybe PC is just cheaper to develop for, i dunno (seems unlikely with so many variations possible from one player to the next, must make QA hell). Next-gen consoles have USBs, giving them access to full-sized keyboards, and more creative controllers such as teh netplay that combines the keyboard and the stick in one mechanism.
Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone www.spankybus.com -3d Artist & Compositor -Writer -Professional Amature
I like PC gaming more. I can get uncomfortable playing console games for an extended period of time, couch just doesn't feel right for that. I also don't really enjoy setting up the console (take controllers out, find things, untangle stuff). PC you just simply turn on and off, and assuming the game is already installed you just click the icon and play. No cleanup afterwards
But also I like the smoothness of graphics the PC is capable of providing if you have a good computer. You can get some sick framerates that consoles just don't really do, and they can't be upgraded to do so. Oblivion is sort of sluggish on xbox compared to the PC version on a high end PC.
Also computer games sound much better. Game sound may not be important to those who just want to use voice chat, but those who don't (like me) want to hear excellent sound, in 5.1 if at all possible. Almost all PC games these days have these. Current Gen, Next Gen, Previous Gen, Previous Previous Gen...surround sound in PC gaming has been around a good long time. It's just barely being introduced to console gaming (dolby digital pro logic does not count). VERY few games did 5.1 sound on the ps2 via optical. Some do for the ps3, but still not many (only big titles). Also only few do it for 360 as well (Oblivion is one of them). Most games just don't do real surround sound. PC games excel at this very well and sound amazing.
Not to mention how easy it is to minimize a game to check something, or just do everything in one place. Get on, check email, read some stuff, play a game, close the game, play some videos or music and look at some pictures. No need to get up and go to another part of the house or switch around hardware.
PCs are lovely things, and nice comfy computer chairs really help too.
I don't get in cramps like I would on the couch or something.
Originally posted by Duvious Controllers however are much more condusive to making those sharp pinpoint movements while button mashing that lend better control to your character in sports and fighting games.
Overall I have no problem with your post except.....There is no circumstance I know of where a consol controller is better than keyboard/nostromo, mouse for accuracy. Rumor has it when Halo came to PC they had to tighten up the aiming reticle to make the game the same equivalent difficulty as the xbox version. I think it has been proven in a FPS twitch shooter, keyboard mouse would wipe the floor with a consol controlled character or at least prevail.
----------------------- Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW. Current MMO: Current Games: L4D, Skyrim Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR. Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
Controllers however are much more condusive to making those sharp pinpoint movements while button mashing that lend better control to your character in sports and fighting games.
Overall I have no problem with your post except.....There is no circumstance I know of where a consol controller is better than keyboard/nostromo, mouse for accuracy. Rumor has it when Halo came to PC they had to tighten up the aiming reticle to make the game the same equivalent difficulty as the xbox version. I think it has been proven in a FPS twitch shooter, keyboard mouse would wipe the floor with a consol controlled character or at least prevail.
Recently, custom converter boxes to allow you to use a CONSOLE controller on PC have lessened this...
But if you play any DreamCast Street Fighter game on an actual DreamCast, then play the exact same game on your PC in MAME emulator, there are VERY notable differences... in response timing, and precision. Go buy any generic USB controller, or even the new X-Box 360 modeled PC USB controller, and play that same game in MAME.
Let's save you the trouble. The DreamCast has tighter response.
But at the end of the day that is to be expected... consoles are made to do only one thing, and they continue selling because they do that one thing very very well. But they do suck parts for RTS, FPS, and anything else that a mouse offers better handling for...
But...as yet... a Converter box, or a USB adapter, DOES add slight lag to your controls... and anyone that has even been to any Capcom International Street Fighter Tournament will note that delay right away, and go right back to the consoles.
That is all Duvious was saying. And he is 100% correct.
Originally posted by devilbane But...as yet... a Converter box, or a USB adapter, DOES add slight lag to your controls... and anyone that has even been to any Capcom International Street Fighter Tournament will note that delay right away, and go right back to the consoles.That is all Duvious was saying. And he is 100% correct.
It sounds like technology gets in the way of this discussion. If the playing field could be equal, then a true comparison of keyboard/mouse vs consol could be made. However, I've noted on many consol games the inclusion of large reticles or auto aiming and think I know why this is so- a finger/thumb controlled joystick will not be as accurate as a mouse imo. Not trying to start anything...
----------------------- Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW. Current MMO: Current Games: L4D, Skyrim Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR. Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
But...as yet... a Converter box, or a USB adapter, DOES add slight lag to your controls... and anyone that has even been to any Capcom International Street Fighter Tournament will note that delay right away, and go right back to the consoles. That is all Duvious was saying. And he is 100% correct.
It sounds like technology gets in the way of this discussion. If the playing field could be equal, then a true comparison of keyboard/mouse vs consol could be made. However, I've noted on many consol games the inclusion of large reticles or auto aiming and think I know why this is so- a finger/thumb controlled joystick will not be as accurate as a mouse imo. Not trying to start anything...
For 99% of all games you are absolutely correct.
However, games like Street Fighter require 6 buttons, 8 way directional, and PRECISE PRECISE EXACT fast twitch reflex speed.
That is why he pointed at Fighting and Sports games as not being as accurate on PC as Console.
And it would be kinda impossible to pull my 27 hit Ken Combo in Capcom versus SNK 2 with a mouse.
I voted for all as they are all good in there own way true the PC has the best graphics and stuff but it doesant ahve a wii remote or does it have games like Zelda Mario galaxys etc.
PC, at least you can configure it the way you need it to be, can't do that with a console (aside from mod chips). Plus you can use the PC for so many more things other than games. You can't use Adobe Photoshop or 3D Studio Max on an Xbox 360, PS3 or Wii.
What shitty options. No Wii? No PS3? I prefer either my 360 or my PC, depending on the type of game and my mood.
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
Consoles are for kids in my book, I actually don't know a single adult that owns one.....
What an odd opinion, what makes PC gaming anymore adult than console gaming?
Well, a PC can be used for mutiple things - I check my email, web search, run tax programs, etc.
As far as I know, I can't do any of those on a console.
THe Wii can do what is highlighted yellow.
Very poorly
<- proud owner, too
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
Depending on the type of game it is. MMORPG's for sure is PC's. First you can see that alot of the games now a days on the PC come with more than one cd/dvd. Meaning there is alot more content on the discs. Consoles you only use 1 disc, which doesn't load or unzip anything. Installing a game opens it up and with multiple discs, so much more room. Even with updates you can download bigger ones. In alot of console games, there are glitches, which usually can't be fixed.
Consoles are for kids in my book, I actually don't know a single adult that owns one.....
What an odd opinion, what makes PC gaming anymore adult than console gaming?
Well, a PC can be used for mutiple things - I check my email, web search, run tax programs, etc.
As far as I know, I can't do any of those on a console.
THe Wii can do what is highlighted yellow.
Very poorly
<- proud owner, too
I have a Sega Dreamcast in my bedroom, and another next to my PC... one is on dialup and the other has the BroadBand adapter.
When I am playing on one PC, and cannot tab out because the game I am playing at that point does not allow it (there are a few that close totally to "prevent trainer programs" from being used) I sometimes use my Dreamcast to look up quests, etc. It is also an MP3 CD player, and when used to be camping a long respawn mob in EverQuest 1 (had to camp some of the Epic 1.0 crap for WEEKS... and Quillimane... that was nightmarish...) I used to play my 8-bit NES games on it during the 15-20 minute waits between kills.
The Dreamcast in my bedroom I play older games on as well, and check my email, and lookup simple things, like movie showtimes and such. The DreamWeb browser was really not bad software at all.
I ALSO have a Dreamcast Keyboard (or 3), and write email on the DCs, and a not too shabby Word Processor on Dreamcast Linux, savable to memory cards.
And the Dreamcast is... what... 8 years old?
I think people are giving Consoles a bum rap, and underestimating them greatly.
On another note:
I have a Dreamcast Mouse and an adapter to let me use my PC trackball on the console. Playing Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 on the system with Keyboard and Trackball allows the Dreamcast builds of these games to rival the PCs available at the time the games came out, in control AND precision.
It is true alot of PC games are on multiple disks, and no games out there can rival an MMORPG for amount of content...
But from Final Fantasy VII onwards, ALOT of console games are on more than one disk. Several PS2 titles spring to mind right away for having had multiple DVDs as well.
I agree the PC is THE platform of choice for a great GREAT many games. But consoles are not as useless as some may be saying.
If anyone is old enough to remember the competition between Atari and Commodore, can easily remember what Commodore's selling point was: versitility. On an Atari, you could...play games. On a Commodore, you could play games, program, use the latest spreadsheet software, the latest word processing software, and etc.
Anyone here old enough to remember who won? Commodore of course! And it's win led the charge from consoles to PCs as being the household item for not only games, but software too. A console is a cold box, it gives you entertainment, but that's it. You can't code with it. You can't change out the hardware easily with it. You can't upgrade it. You can't use the nearly countless types of software for other activities with it (Can a console do CAD? Hmmmm???). That's why the console will never beat the workstation aka the PC, ever. And you can quote me on it.
If anyone is old enough to remember the competition between Atari and Commodore, can easily remember what Commodore's selling point was: versitility. On an Atari, you could...play games. On a Commodore, you could play games, program, use the latest spreadsheet software, the latest word processing software, and etc. Anyone here old enough to remember who won? Commodore of course! And it's win led the charge from consoles to PCs as being the household item for not only games, but software too. A console is a cold box, it gives you entertainment, but that's it. You can't code with it. You can't change out the hardware easily with it. You can't upgrade it. You can't use the nearly countless types of software for other activities with it (Can a console do CAD? Hmmmm???). That's why the console will never beat the workstation aka the PC, ever. And you can quote me on it. -- Brede
Actually...
the Atari 400/800 computer line was every bit as flexible as the Commodore 64... same graphics abilities roughly, similar capabilities, and very very similar non-gaming software was available... Cassette Tape and Floppy drives were available for both... printers (I LOVED my old Cannon with the Wizard of ID word processor... did my junior high homework on that thing!!!!).. from an evolutionary standpoint you could call the two very close cousins, if not almost brothers seperated at birth.You could even get very non-console-like "games" like Sid Meyer's F-15 Strike Eagle combat flight simulator for the Atari 800, on 5.25" floppy disk, and the graphics and gameplay were identical to the C64 version in every way.
The Amiga was best known for it's gaming abilities, and the Apple II was the king of spreadsheets when the Amiga was ruling.
I believe the 386-486 era was when the PC became viable to "normal" households as gaming machines. And the consoles have held the lead in the gaming market tenaciously, all the way up through 2005. I am not at all certain the PC has truly dethroned the Console market yet... there have been alot... ALOT... of Wii sales... and the X-Box 360 is not exactly sitting idle either.
If anyone is old enough to remember the competition between Atari and Commodore, can easily remember what Commodore's selling point was: versitility. On an Atari, you could...play games. On a Commodore, you could play games, program, use the latest spreadsheet software, the latest word processing software, and etc. Anyone here old enough to remember who won? Commodore of course! And it's win led the charge from consoles to PCs as being the household item for not only games, but software too. A console is a cold box, it gives you entertainment, but that's it. You can't code with it. You can't change out the hardware easily with it. You can't upgrade it. You can't use the nearly countless types of software for other activities with it (Can a console do CAD? Hmmmm???). That's why the console will never beat the workstation aka the PC, ever. And you can quote me on it. -- Brede
What are you talking about? The PC platform isn't dead, but the console market certainly stomped the PC market. It definitely is more succesfull in terms of gaming then the PC.
Now ofcourse the amount of units Commodore sold is very impressive. The people who bought the Commodore for gaming probably bought it because the Commodore was capable of showing better graphics. This is no longer the case in todays era. The playstation 3 and Xbox360 can easily compete with the high end computers, and the Wii brings you an experience no PC will be able to give you
Atari Won for the exact same reason Consoles still beat PC's.
1: Its cheaper
2: It has more, and better games.
Consoles are designed for gaming, Gaming is not the main function of any PC, and the evidence lies in front of you, the keyboard. It i clearly not designed with gaming in mind.
You can't upgrade a console because you don't have to. Upgrading is exactly what makes a PC far more expensive for gaming then a console will ever be. I will never find a pc for 600$ that has the features and power of a Playstation 3.
I really like to able to walk into a store, buy a game that plays great and looks great without having to worry if my PC has the graphic card required, If my PC has enough ram and if I'm updated to the latest drivers.
If anyone is old enough to remember the competition between Atari and Commodore, can easily remember what Commodore's selling point was: versitility. On an Atari, you could...play games. On a Commodore, you could play games, program, use the latest spreadsheet software, the latest word processing software, and etc. Anyone here old enough to remember who won? Commodore of course! And it's win led the charge from consoles to PCs as being the household item for not only games, but software too. A console is a cold box, it gives you entertainment, but that's it. You can't code with it. You can't change out the hardware easily with it. You can't upgrade it. You can't use the nearly countless types of software for other activities with it (Can a console do CAD? Hmmmm???). That's why the console will never beat the workstation aka the PC, ever. And you can quote me on it. -- Brede
What are you talking about? The PC platform isn't dead, but the console market certainly stomped the PC market. It definitely is more succesfull in terms of gaming then the PC.
Now ofcourse the amount of units Commodore sold is very impressive. The people who bought the Commodore for gaming probably bought it because the Commodore was capable of showing better graphics. This is no longer the case in todays era. The playstation 3 and Xbox360 can easily compete with the high end computers, and the Wii brings you an experience no PC will be able to give you
Atari Won for the exact same reason Consoles still beat PC's.
1: Its cheaper
2: It has more, and better games.
Consoles are designed for gaming, Gaming is not the main function of any PC, and the evidence lies in front of you, the keyboard. It i clearly not designed with gaming in mind.
You can't upgrade a console because you don't have to. Upgrading is exactly what makes a PC far more expensive for gaming then a console will ever be. I will never find a pc for 600$ that has the features and power of a Playstation 3.
I really like to able to walk into a store, buy a game that plays great and looks great without having to worry if my PC has the graphic card required, If my PC has enough ram and if I'm updated to the latest drivers.
But you know what? Everyone who got an atari 2600 "Wanted" a Commodore 64 but their momma and daddy couldn't afford one and damn I was mad that year, I thought santa dissed me on that deal LOL.
" But you know what? Everyone who got an atari 2600 "Wanted" a Commodore 64 but their momma and daddy couldn't afford one and damn I was mad that year, I thought santa dissed me on that deal LOL."
Read my post above... I had both a C64 and an Atari 800... then a C128... and in all honesty, until the Amiga everyone at my house preferred the Atari 800 (then later the 800XL) over any of the Commodores... and the Amiga was great, but after I replaced the 800XL with a 130XE I seldom played the Amiga.
The people that had the 2600, then later the Atari 7800 likely had the broadest selection of games and accessories of all, possibly until the Playstation arrived. I had been enamored with the 2600 briefly, but seeing the 8-bit graphics of the 800, and playing my first Dungeons and Dragons computer game on the 800... I could never go back to the realm of "this block is trying to catch that block over there" again.
There's no doubt, (For me) that any mmo game should be played on a pc, but sandbox, racing and war games i prefer to play on a console...
Only downside for console games, is the high price on both the games and the freakin' console.. I did invest in both the 360, and the Ps3, so i should be all covered!
Ya i would have to say console is better for gaming, but any real gamer console or not has a pc close by to give his games a lil somethin extra .
and as for price thing at the rate these consoles r bein priced u can just as easily get a pc that is more then good enuff for ur gaming needs. people just prefer console now because they can use it more easily without feeling like a dummy.
Comments
That said, I have no problem with my PC, my mouse and my keyboard. FFXI was the only MMO i've ever played on a console, and frankly I can't complain. Moral of the story is, if a developer really wants to make an mmo viable for console, there is no good reason they cannot. Maybe PC is just cheaper to develop for, i dunno (seems unlikely with so many variations possible from one player to the next, must make QA hell). Next-gen consoles have USBs, giving them access to full-sized keyboards, and more creative controllers such as teh netplay that combines the keyboard and the stick in one mechanism.
Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone
www.spankybus.com
-3d Artist & Compositor
-Writer
-Professional Amature
But also I like the smoothness of graphics the PC is capable of providing if you have a good computer. You can get some sick framerates that consoles just don't really do, and they can't be upgraded to do so. Oblivion is sort of sluggish on xbox compared to the PC version on a high end PC.
Also computer games sound much better. Game sound may not be important to those who just want to use voice chat, but those who don't (like me) want to hear excellent sound, in 5.1 if at all possible. Almost all PC games these days have these. Current Gen, Next Gen, Previous Gen, Previous Previous Gen...surround sound in PC gaming has been around a good long time. It's just barely being introduced to console gaming (dolby digital pro logic does not count). VERY few games did 5.1 sound on the ps2 via optical. Some do for the ps3, but still not many (only big titles). Also only few do it for 360 as well (Oblivion is one of them). Most games just don't do real surround sound. PC games excel at this very well and sound amazing.
Not to mention how easy it is to minimize a game to check something, or just do everything in one place. Get on, check email, read some stuff, play a game, close the game, play some videos or music and look at some pictures. No need to get up and go to another part of the house or switch around hardware.
PCs are lovely things, and nice comfy computer chairs really help too.
I don't get in cramps like I would on the couch or something.
Overall I have no problem with your post except.....There is no circumstance I know of where a consol controller is better than keyboard/nostromo, mouse for accuracy. Rumor has it when Halo came to PC they had to tighten up the aiming reticle to make the game the same equivalent difficulty as the xbox version. I think it has been proven in a FPS twitch shooter, keyboard mouse would wipe the floor with a consol controlled character or at least prevail.
-----------------------
Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW.
Current MMO:
Current Games: L4D, Skyrim
Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR.
Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
Overall I have no problem with your post except.....There is no circumstance I know of where a consol controller is better than keyboard/nostromo, mouse for accuracy. Rumor has it when Halo came to PC they had to tighten up the aiming reticle to make the game the same equivalent difficulty as the xbox version. I think it has been proven in a FPS twitch shooter, keyboard mouse would wipe the floor with a consol controlled character or at least prevail.
Recently, custom converter boxes to allow you to use a CONSOLE controller on PC have lessened this...But if you play any DreamCast Street Fighter game on an actual DreamCast, then play the exact same game on your PC in MAME emulator, there are VERY notable differences... in response timing, and precision. Go buy any generic USB controller, or even the new X-Box 360 modeled PC USB controller, and play that same game in MAME.
Let's save you the trouble. The DreamCast has tighter response.
But at the end of the day that is to be expected... consoles are made to do only one thing, and they continue selling because they do that one thing very very well. But they do suck parts for RTS, FPS, and anything else that a mouse offers better handling for...
But...as yet... a Converter box, or a USB adapter, DOES add slight lag to your controls... and anyone that has even been to any Capcom International Street Fighter Tournament will note that delay right away, and go right back to the consoles.
That is all Duvious was saying. And he is 100% correct.
It sounds like technology gets in the way of this discussion. If the playing field could be equal, then a true comparison of keyboard/mouse vs consol could be made. However, I've noted on many consol games the inclusion of large reticles or auto aiming and think I know why this is so- a finger/thumb controlled joystick will not be as accurate as a mouse imo. Not trying to start anything...
-----------------------
Past MMOs- Planetside, WoW.
Current MMO:
Current Games: L4D, Skyrim
Tried- ATITD, EQ2, SoR, Vanguard,SL,LOTRO,SotNW,SWTOR.
Anticipating- GW2, Planetside2
It sounds like technology gets in the way of this discussion. If the playing field could be equal, then a true comparison of keyboard/mouse vs consol could be made. However, I've noted on many consol games the inclusion of large reticles or auto aiming and think I know why this is so- a finger/thumb controlled joystick will not be as accurate as a mouse imo. Not trying to start anything...
For 99% of all games you are absolutely correct.However, games like Street Fighter require 6 buttons, 8 way directional, and PRECISE PRECISE EXACT fast twitch reflex speed.
That is why he pointed at Fighting and Sports games as not being as accurate on PC as Console.
And it would be kinda impossible to pull my 27 hit Ken Combo in Capcom versus SNK 2 with a mouse.
Much less the Ryo 99 hit infinity combo...
What an odd opinion, what makes PC gaming anymore adult than console gaming?Well, a PC can be used for mutiple things - I check my email, web search, run tax programs, etc.
As far as I know, I can't do any of those on a console.
Well, a PC can be used for mutiple things - I check my email, web search, run tax programs, etc.
As far as I know, I can't do any of those on a console.
THe Wii can do what is highlighted yellow.
And after the kids are asleep, they sneak down for a fix in private. They even have a line when caught. "I'm just verifying kid friendly content!"
An even better line would be "Daddy what this?", and watch him squerm.
I voted for all as they are all good in there own way true the PC has the best graphics and stuff but it doesant ahve a wii remote or does it have games like Zelda Mario galaxys etc.
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
Well, a PC can be used for mutiple things - I check my email, web search, run tax programs, etc.
As far as I know, I can't do any of those on a console.
THe Wii can do what is highlighted yellow.
Very poorly
<- proud owner, too
MMO games played or tested: EQ, DAoC, Archlord, Auto Assault, CoH, CoV, EQ2, EVE, Guild Wars, Hellgate: London, Linneage II, LOTRO, MxO, Planetside, SWG, Sword of the New World, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard, WWIIOL, WOW, Age of Conan
I am starting to like xbox 360 more than PC games though.
Boycott EA Games. RIP Sim City.
Well, a PC can be used for mutiple things - I check my email, web search, run tax programs, etc.
As far as I know, I can't do any of those on a console.
THe Wii can do what is highlighted yellow.
Very poorly
<- proud owner, too
I have a Sega Dreamcast in my bedroom, and another next to my PC... one is on dialup and the other has the BroadBand adapter.
When I am playing on one PC, and cannot tab out because the game I am playing at that point does not allow it (there are a few that close totally to "prevent trainer programs" from being used) I sometimes use my Dreamcast to look up quests, etc. It is also an MP3 CD player, and when used to be camping a long respawn mob in EverQuest 1 (had to camp some of the Epic 1.0 crap for WEEKS... and Quillimane... that was nightmarish...) I used to play my 8-bit NES games on it during the 15-20 minute waits between kills.
The Dreamcast in my bedroom I play older games on as well, and check my email, and lookup simple things, like movie showtimes and such. The DreamWeb browser was really not bad software at all.
I ALSO have a Dreamcast Keyboard (or 3), and write email on the DCs, and a not too shabby Word Processor on Dreamcast Linux, savable to memory cards.
And the Dreamcast is... what... 8 years old?
I think people are giving Consoles a bum rap, and underestimating them greatly.
On another note:
I have a Dreamcast Mouse and an adapter to let me use my PC trackball on the console. Playing Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 on the system with Keyboard and Trackball allows the Dreamcast builds of these games to rival the PCs available at the time the games came out, in control AND precision.
kingofnothin
It is true alot of PC games are on multiple disks, and no games out there can rival an MMORPG for amount of content...
But from Final Fantasy VII onwards, ALOT of console games are on more than one disk. Several PS2 titles spring to mind right away for having had multiple DVDs as well.
I agree the PC is THE platform of choice for a great GREAT many games. But consoles are not as useless as some may be saying.
If anyone is old enough to remember the competition between Atari and Commodore, can easily remember what Commodore's selling point was: versitility. On an Atari, you could...play games. On a Commodore, you could play games, program, use the latest spreadsheet software, the latest word processing software, and etc.
Anyone here old enough to remember who won? Commodore of course! And it's win led the charge from consoles to PCs as being the household item for not only games, but software too. A console is a cold box, it gives you entertainment, but that's it. You can't code with it. You can't change out the hardware easily with it. You can't upgrade it. You can't use the nearly countless types of software for other activities with it (Can a console do CAD? Hmmmm???). That's why the console will never beat the workstation aka the PC, ever. And you can quote me on it.
-- Brede
the Atari 400/800 computer line was every bit as flexible as the Commodore 64... same graphics abilities roughly, similar capabilities, and very very similar non-gaming software was available... Cassette Tape and Floppy drives were available for both... printers (I LOVED my old Cannon with the Wizard of ID word processor... did my junior high homework on that thing!!!!).. from an evolutionary standpoint you could call the two very close cousins, if not almost brothers seperated at birth.You could even get very non-console-like "games" like Sid Meyer's F-15 Strike Eagle combat flight simulator for the Atari 800, on 5.25" floppy disk, and the graphics and gameplay were identical to the C64 version in every way.
The Amiga was best known for it's gaming abilities, and the Apple II was the king of spreadsheets when the Amiga was ruling.
I believe the 386-486 era was when the PC became viable to "normal" households as gaming machines. And the consoles have held the lead in the gaming market tenaciously, all the way up through 2005. I am not at all certain the PC has truly dethroned the Console market yet... there have been alot... ALOT... of Wii sales... and the X-Box 360 is not exactly sitting idle either.
And I'm sorry, the Commodore won?
According to this page:
http://oldcomputers.net/c64.html
The Commodore 64 sold 17 million units.
Compared to the Atari 2600
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_2600
which sold 40 million units.
Now ofcourse the amount of units Commodore sold is very impressive. The people who bought the Commodore for gaming probably bought it because the Commodore was capable of showing better graphics. This is no longer the case in todays era. The playstation 3 and Xbox360 can easily compete with the high end computers, and the Wii brings you an experience no PC will be able to give you
Atari Won for the exact same reason Consoles still beat PC's.
1: Its cheaper
2: It has more, and better games.
Consoles are designed for gaming, Gaming is not the main function of any PC, and the evidence lies in front of you, the keyboard. It i clearly not designed with gaming in mind.
You can't upgrade a console because you don't have to. Upgrading is exactly what makes a PC far more expensive for gaming then a console will ever be. I will never find a pc for 600$ that has the features and power of a Playstation 3.
I really like to able to walk into a store, buy a game that plays great and looks great without having to worry if my PC has the graphic card required, If my PC has enough ram and if I'm updated to the latest drivers.
And I'm sorry, the Commodore won?
According to this page:
http://oldcomputers.net/c64.html
The Commodore 64 sold 17 million units.
Compared to the Atari 2600
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_2600
which sold 40 million units.
Now ofcourse the amount of units Commodore sold is very impressive. The people who bought the Commodore for gaming probably bought it because the Commodore was capable of showing better graphics. This is no longer the case in todays era. The playstation 3 and Xbox360 can easily compete with the high end computers, and the Wii brings you an experience no PC will be able to give you
Atari Won for the exact same reason Consoles still beat PC's.
1: Its cheaper
2: It has more, and better games.
Consoles are designed for gaming, Gaming is not the main function of any PC, and the evidence lies in front of you, the keyboard. It i clearly not designed with gaming in mind.
You can't upgrade a console because you don't have to. Upgrading is exactly what makes a PC far more expensive for gaming then a console will ever be. I will never find a pc for 600$ that has the features and power of a Playstation 3.
I really like to able to walk into a store, buy a game that plays great and looks great without having to worry if my PC has the graphic card required, If my PC has enough ram and if I'm updated to the latest drivers.
But you know what? Everyone who got an atari 2600 "Wanted" a Commodore 64 but their momma and daddy couldn't afford one
and damn I was mad that year, I thought santa dissed me on that deal LOL.
" But you know what? Everyone who got an atari 2600 "Wanted" a Commodore 64 but their momma and daddy couldn't afford one
Read my post above... I had both a C64 and an Atari 800... then a C128... and in all honesty, until the Amiga everyone at my house preferred the Atari 800 (then later the 800XL) over any of the Commodores... and the Amiga was great, but after I replaced the 800XL with a 130XE I seldom played the Amiga.
The people that had the 2600, then later the Atari 7800 likely had the broadest selection of games and accessories of all, possibly until the Playstation arrived. I had been enamored with the 2600 briefly, but seeing the 8-bit graphics of the 800, and playing my first Dungeons and Dragons computer game on the 800... I could never go back to the realm of "this block is trying to catch that block over there" again.
Only downside for console games, is the high price on both the games and the freakin' console.. I did invest in both the 360, and the Ps3, so i should be all covered!
See ya
Ya i would have to say console is better for gaming, but any real gamer console or not has a pc close by to give his games a lil somethin extra .
and as for price thing at the rate these consoles r bein priced u can just as easily get a pc that is more then good enuff for ur gaming needs. people just prefer console now because they can use it more easily without feeling like a dummy.
anyway console wins in my book jus for titles.