Consoles vs The PC

The Console community can get quite annoying, especially online. People who play COD4 on Xbox360 are complete arseholes and constantly insult each other. Opposed to the PC version, i rarely see any verbal bashing aside from being called a noob. What I mean is, on PC there are rarely any idiots acting like this

"Ay bluh, why you suck, @#$% you, i @#$^ed yo mamma"

-_-

I prefer PC's online, but there are titles on consoles i just can't miss for the single player gameplay. FFXIII, MGS4, Killlzone 2, Silent Hill 5.

 

That's because more people have headsets with consoles than with computers, as headsets come with the console (360s anyway). But yeah, for some reason there's a lot more people who're idiots on consoles than on the PC. The only thing PCs fall behind consoles on is hacking, and most people don't even do that either.

 

PC all the way

 

There are both good and bad aspects of having a PC.

The good about PC:

- Best for RTS and FPS games than a console.
- Extremely good graphics and a wide selection of games.
- Not only for games: endless quantity of superb programs
- You can upgrade your hardware, you don't have to buy a whole new PC

The bad about PC:

-Usually very heavy
-You need to put down lots of cash for a decent gaming computer
-Virus is a pain in the Arse. Functionality can also be a pain.
-You have to install drivers and put up with windows and all of its flaws.

The good about consoles:

-Really portable
-Great party machine (no need to set up a LAN...)
-Cheap for the graphical/functional quality

The bad about consoles:

- You have to have a HDTV if you want HD quality
- The new consoles have annoying problems (red ring of death)
- Only for games and media
- Games cost more than PC
- You have to buy a whole new console after a year.

 

Also bad about consoles... You have to get the next one after, like, half a year.

 

Because it's outdated or because they break that fast?

Why're graphics under PCs anyway? They're on par if not better on consoles

 

'Cause they're outdated so quickly.

 

Do you even have a console?
The span for one generation is about 4 years, more or less depending on console. First Xbox got replaced rather fast while PS2 only started giving up recently, despite PS3 being on the market for a while

 

No, because they're outdated so quickly. Seriously, four years is a **** life for something that expensive. My compy was new back in 2002, and it's still running fairly strong. The only problem's I've really had were with World of WarCraft and Portal, where I needed more RAM and a better Graphics Card, respectively, and it only cost about seventy dollars all up, and I'm not expecting to have to replace anything for StarCraft2 or Diablo3, which I'll most likely be playing for years to come. If I'd've had the equivalent problem with a console, I'd've simply needed to have bought the next one. They're just replaced to quickly and have games have no compatibility with previous versions.

 

All valid, but it doesn't explain where the 'half a year' came from

graphics cards cost less than 70 dollars? Oo

 

...Hyperbole for dramatic effect.

And yes, provided you're buying a GeForce FX 5500. The only problem with my old one was that it had no Pixel Shader capabilities. The GeForce FX 5500 does. Problem Solvent!

 

Oh. Why would you need to change consoles so often if you're only playing a few old games anyway :?
Libraries of PS1 or PS2 alone could last you for many years

 

'Cause with PS's and XBox's and everything, there're always newer equivalencies. For example, Halo. Who would still be playing Halo2 now that Halo3's out on XBox 360? It's different with computer games, or at least the ones I'm interested in anyway. It takes ages for the sequels of these games to be released, but with things like Halo, it's literally, about two years between each game. No hyperbole there.

 

You have an FX5500, right? I'm no expert at hardware and predicting requirements but you will need to change that GPU for those two games. I've already got rid of my 7300GT in spirit because even that would die under the load.

 

Well I guess I'll just have to see when the specs are announced. Blizzard's usually keep things fairly open for everyone, and I'm not the type who always wants to use the best possible graphics settings, so I'm not overly concerned, but if it does end up that I need a new one, I'll probably just buy a relatively top-of-the-line lappy.

Regardless, I very much doubt you'd need to replace a 7 Series. They're only up to nine, aren't they?

 

Given laptop's customability, might as well get a console, hm?

 

Not for Diablo3, haha.

 

Or SC2, I know
Jus sayin

 

@ Meee:

A gamer PC with a good monitor is way better than a console. End of discussion.
Crysis for example needed so much processing that even the PS3 couldn't handle it. So the game bacame a PC-only game.

And please, don't tell me that consoles have a long life span.
Most PS2's over a year old start getting disc reading errors because of the laser.
The 360 is fragile and gets hot. Also gets the red ring of death.
And a guy I know had serious issues with his PS3. First it swallowed his game, and when he got it back the graphics started going wacko!

 

My PS2 is uh... three years old?

No problems at all.

My Gamecube isn't far behind either...

And my Xbox 360 I've had for almost a year now, no problems with it at all.

And my friend has had his PS3 longer than my 360, and he hasn't had one problem.