Prepare for a GREAT online game, WARHAWK
- Thread starter SupraOfDoom
- Start date
Simple. They are useless - I already have several computers that are significantly more powerful than any console on the market. Why would I want to throw more money at another gaming system when I already have three of them?
Consoles will never be able to compete with a real computer. Computers are faster, have more capacity, and can pump out better graphics at higher resolutions.
Consoles will never be able to compete with a real computer. Computers are faster, have more capacity, and can pump out better graphics at higher resolutions.
Pumping out better graphics is relative, higher resolutions is pointless. I assure you a 360 could put out whatever resolution you want, but TVs don't support it. Also, computer games generally aren't as fun because you have to worry about 2.9e1333 more keys. Few people can aim decently with a mouse intuitively, which is less fun for the user because they can't get good off the bat they have to relearn how to aim. That being said, PS3s are real shitty. $600 Bluray player basically. Limiting hosting at houses is a bad idea, I know many people that have T1 or better that could DEFINITELY support 32 people with no lag. I myself have hosted 16 with 7 of those being in Europe, 2 in Canada, the other 7 in the US with no lag. Limit players = limit fun = lame
So what resolution is your computer running in games right now? Better be 1900+ or your lying to yourself... Your telling me your PC's are more powerful the the cell processor? In comparisons PS3 could process the same tasks as fast as some of the worlds super computers. Infact when it was concieved it was ranked #250 something on the list for most powerful computers. Yes in time computers will have caught up and be faster, but they have to run operating systems ( and just look at the system requirments of vista, that eats up so much of your computers processing speed ) not just games. Also, in order to maximize your computer game experience now, you need a phsyics card, which most games won't even support, the technology right now is no where near being take advantage of on the PC, while on the other hand PS3, Wii, and 360 ALL TAKE advantage of the physics chip + engine. Not to mention the price, for console you get a better price EASILY over a PC.... shit to build a PC with a Blu-ray drive is HELLA $$$. Not to mention to get a good graphics card your going to be putting almost as much money into that as a PS3 alone. PC's will never compare to consoles in terms of price, period.GrimJack said:
As far as consoles never being able to compete with a real computer? That's laughable... look at computer game vs console game sales... since around the time of HL the computer era has gone mega down hill, game sales are low compared to consoles, along with developers switching to consoles. Now, don't get me wrong, like 5 of 10 of my top favorite games of all time are on PC ( SC, Diablo1-2, Quake1-3, Doom ect ), but console has ALOT more variety when it comes to games. Now days, you see MMO's, FPS, RTS, and very rarely anything else on PC's. Where are the Gran Turismo's, where are the Zelda's, where are the Mario games, where are the Final Fantasy's, where are the fighting games? Answer, CONSOLE.
The reason PS3 is a great system is because its similar, yet different then a PC, its more of a media center / game console / entertainment system for all your living room HD-TV needs.
Right now, Consoles own PC's for free, there isn't SHIT out for amazing games for PC, and don't even mention WoW... in time I'm sure the balance will sway back, when Blizzard starts being so damn greedy and sitting on their asses collecting money from all the people wasting time with WoW.... then the real games will roll in.
PS3 is a great system get off the crack. But yeah, no doubt the Blu-ray player really helps sell it, but I love itQuin said:
. Anyone who has the system thinks its great. Eitherway, lets stay off the X console is better the X console debate cause, the point was about PC's vs Consoles... which right now all the new consoles are owning the PC's in terms of games.Also, 64 players is HELLA bandwidth, its a smart choice for them to go with 32, maximize the game running smoothly.
Last edited:
I have yet to meet a person with a PS3 who thinks it sucks, all the haters are the people who own a 360, Wii, or love PC games, hmm... no shit! PS3 owners know its just getting started but already see the potential it has, and all the great games that will be coming out in the future. But guess what, I own a PS3, a Wii, a 360, 1 bad ass recently built PC, and 1 decent PC... yet I see PS3 being the best...mkiiSupraMan18 said:
The only reason I would say PC games are better....
Downloadable content/mods. Beat a game, DL new levels, tougher AI, new weapons, w/e... Get the PS3 to that level and it'll be great. plus, I wont have to worry about being in the middle of a game and someone msg me on MSN and my computer go straight to desktop and lag enough for me to alt+tab to see myself die. Resistance was absolutely awesome, a challenging game on medium *I don't care if you beat it on expert and never died.... seriously....* and the graphics were amazing IMO.
Just seeing the 'cutscenes' and then going straight into the game at the beginning got me all pumped up. I can't wait for Final Fantasy, Grand Turismo, and Grand Theft Auto.
Oh, that reminds me, when Gran Turismo comes out, I bet there will be a few people changing their minds when ppl start posting how awesome it is.
*edit*
SOD, how is the wii treating you? I was gonna buy one for the fiance, but figured it would get old pretty quick.
Downloadable content/mods. Beat a game, DL new levels, tougher AI, new weapons, w/e... Get the PS3 to that level and it'll be great. plus, I wont have to worry about being in the middle of a game and someone msg me on MSN and my computer go straight to desktop and lag enough for me to alt+tab to see myself die. Resistance was absolutely awesome, a challenging game on medium *I don't care if you beat it on expert and never died.... seriously....* and the graphics were amazing IMO.
Just seeing the 'cutscenes' and then going straight into the game at the beginning got me all pumped up. I can't wait for Final Fantasy, Grand Turismo, and Grand Theft Auto.
Oh, that reminds me, when Gran Turismo comes out, I bet there will be a few people changing their minds when ppl start posting how awesome it is.
*edit*
SOD, how is the wii treating you? I was gonna buy one for the fiance, but figured it would get old pretty quick.
Mouse is less intuitive? lol - sure thing, it's taken me all of 5 minutes to teach anyone how to use one. Ever notice that PC players aren't allowed to play online vs console players? Ever think why? It's because the console players would be pissed off pretty quick because they just can't compete.
I play games in 1600x1200 at the moment, find me a console / tv combination that is worth playing at that kind of resolution for less than $2000. Yes, you have to figure in the cost of the tv if I have to figure in the cost of the monitor.
If consoles are so powerful, why aren't the demanding games available for them? How long did it take to port Far Cry to consoles? And how much shittier did it look when it made it there?
Where are the real time strategy games for the consoles? Where are the MMO games for the consoles? They have first person shooters, but the implementation is terrible - Halo on the Xbox feels like you're walking in molasses by comparison to the PC version, and the PC port of Halo wasn't particularly good.
The only area I've seen where consoles are superior is sports games, and that's a genre that I've never been able to give a damn about.
Mario? Zelda? Those belong on portables with Tetris.
I play games in 1600x1200 at the moment, find me a console / tv combination that is worth playing at that kind of resolution for less than $2000. Yes, you have to figure in the cost of the tv if I have to figure in the cost of the monitor.
If consoles are so powerful, why aren't the demanding games available for them? How long did it take to port Far Cry to consoles? And how much shittier did it look when it made it there?
Where are the real time strategy games for the consoles? Where are the MMO games for the consoles? They have first person shooters, but the implementation is terrible - Halo on the Xbox feels like you're walking in molasses by comparison to the PC version, and the PC port of Halo wasn't particularly good.
The only area I've seen where consoles are superior is sports games, and that's a genre that I've never been able to give a damn about.
Mario? Zelda? Those belong on portables with Tetris.
damn ya'll take gaming and resolution seriously....
It looks purdy, thats all I care about, same with everyone I play with. :icon_bigg
It looks purdy, thats all I care about, same with everyone I play with. :icon_bigg
mkiiSupraMan18 said:
I honestly have not touched it since 5 hours in of Zelda the first week I got it. I'm much too busy with my PS3 and PSP ... and nothing looks too appealing for it yet, besides Mario Party which isn't out yet. Some of my friends really love it though, but they are more into the gather aspect of it.
That's funny, mouse and keyboard are plug and play on PS3... USB....GrimJack said:
The reason Fry Cry took "so long" to be on console is because its a completely different system of design then a PC.... praticullarly the wii. Developers are just getting started with the systems, and have to figure out how to program for that specific console, its not just coping and pasting like some ports are. Also, when it comes to Wii, the system just isn't designed for SUPER HIGH END graphics or FPS's in general, more for fun party games and everyone knows this.. so I wouldn't expect it to be better then the PC version. But keep in mind its ONLY $250!!
As for MMO's and FPS's, THANK FUCKING GOD there are not many MMO's on console, what a fucking waste of time! WoW is a horriable game, DAOC was horriable game, EQ is a horriable game, FFXI is a horriable game!!!! Who wants to spend majority of a game grinding for high numbers? Not I ! As for FPS's, for now I agree that they belong more on PC then console, but with plug and play USB keyboard and mouses, its the same playing field now... Believe me, I hate playing FPS on shitty controllers, I'm a FPS player at heart, I played CS from beta - 1.5, even won a computer playing it.
And you can EASILY find a PS3, and a 1080p TV that will cost LESS then a computer than can produce the graphics PS3 can..... it may not be 50" like what you would ideally get, but it sure would be bigger then a monitor.
When it comes down to it, argue what you want, your missing out on ALOT more with out a console then you are a PC. I like both, I know both, I HAVE LIKE EVERY SYSTEM
, EVEN ONES I HATE .PS, and yeah, Halo sucks, if you've been playing FPS's on PC's since Doom, and I mean most of them, you'd know that Halo is NOT a good FPS. Honestly, what a boring slow paced game, I'll stick with Star Wars Jedi Knight II, Quakes and Dooms
.
Tell you what, lets just agree to disagree here. Somehow I doubt either one of us is going to convince the other.
I'm going to go play another game of Supreme Commander... on my PC.
Back to your regularly scheduled thread - how about that console game linked to in the first post?
I'm going to go play another game of Supreme Commander... on my PC.
Back to your regularly scheduled thread - how about that console game linked to in the first post?
See, I don't disagree as much as you disagree, since I enjoy both , but its all good I see your side. Anyway, yes, Warhawk, how come not much love? You guys play the original?
, but its all good I see your side. Anyway, yes, Warhawk, how come not much love? You guys play the original?