Console Vs Pc: Battle 334252234 And Counting... Another generation, another war

[AllfatherBlack 0]

Well, I hate to do this, but considering the next generation of consoles is now available ( atleast 1/3rd of them ), I have to ask;

 

Whos Future Is Brighter: Console or PC gaming?

 

 

 

It seems to me that with every generation, console graphics improve nothing short of dramatically. Of course, thats likely due to the fact that between each generation is a number of years with which to progress ones technology. But the PC has had better graphics than every console since day 1. Until today. Well, whatever day the Xbox 360 was released.

 

Consoles now have better graphics than even the highest end consumer PCs. Anyone who says otherwise is only kidding themselves, especially considering that, true to every generation of console, the graphics only get markedly better as time progresses ( until support is eventually dropped ). Considering the difference between 1st generation PS games and PS games at the end of its life cycle, Im confident that we will only be amazed as things get better. And, I hate to put all my eggs in one basket, which will of course come and bite me in the **bottom** later as it always does, but Im going to guess that gap between console and PC graphics will only continue to get larger ( in the consoles favor ). The generallized approach of the PC ( in order to cover every potential users needs ) will artificially "slow" the progress of consumer-level graphics, Im guesstimating, until we eventually get to a point where, as far as graphics are concerned, there wont be a debate. The dedicated graphics technology on consoles ( look at what ATI did with the 360, and how their game fell to *BLEEP* on the PC because of it ) should hold onto the lead for some time now...

 

Of course, I would be a fool to finish this debate based on graphics. In fact, I purposely chose what SHOULD BE the weakest point, considering how insignificant graphics truely should be to a real gamer ( note: I am a aware that good graphics make for a better game. Duh. ). So the eye-pleasing goes to consoles, but what about the aureal experiance? Sound-wise, technology on both fronts, seems to me ( please feel free to correct me as Im NOT an audiophile ), is pretty much the same. Youre just as likely to have a 7.1 setup on your PC as your TV ( okay, probably a little more likely on the TV ). And considering you can hook up most any decent sound setup to most any device the outputs sound ( meaning you can use awesome tech on either PC or console ), this is almost a tie. Almost. While the tech seems to be similiar for both sides, the implementation of this technology is no doubt going to different. With all the THX/DTS hub-bub, enviromental effects and all the jivewords you can think of, someone HAS to be implementing sound better than the other. As I said before, Im not an audiophile. This whole blurb is just an opinion-piece which others can use to step off of. So, instead of "deciding" for you, Im going to leave this particular topic up for debate. Who do you think is better?

 

We've covered sight and sound, two very important factors to anyones gaming experiance. But what about the interface? PCs and consoles, as Im sure we all know, use widely differing techs to interface with the game. PCs have the good ol mouse and K, and I like to call it, where as consoles have the reliable joypad. Of course, both mediums have peripherals to replace the opposite mediums interface, but we're going to ignore that fact since neither format ( PC nor Console ) has implemented rival tech very well. Mice on the console have been few and far between and almost always of poor quality, where as most PC joypads lack some damn button you wanted ( especially if you ROM multiple platforms on the PC ). Also, feel is a matter of PREFERANCE, so this inheritly cannot apply to everyone, and may very well not apply to ANYone. So, back to the question, mouse and K or joypads. M n K's ( mouse and keyboard ) are definetly better for the widely popular first person shooter, but consoles have made valiant strides towards closing that gap. Halo ( the original, I will NOT suffix it with " 1 " ), for me, was nigh perfect. I can play Halo on the Xbox, I would say, 90% as well as I can on the PC. Good enough for me, but clearly not perfect. Strategy games are also more intuitive on the PC. But thats pretty much it there. Most other genres of games ( adventure, sports, RPG, etc ) tend to be MUCH easier to play on a joypad ( which we're assuming is connected to a console ). I dread the though of trying to complete the original Crash Bandicoot with all the extras on a keyboard. *shiver* Then theres what I like to call "the Macintosh" effect. Like most blossoming technologies, the initial goal of any product is "more." More buttons, more functions, more uses, more goodness, right? Not so much. While we appreciated more buttons in RTS games as they grew up, "more" is quickly becoming NOT better. Macintosh has long shunned the idea of multibutton mice for ease of use ( an idea I do not agree with, mind you ). Now, we are starting to see more software shun more buttons and instead go with easier to use or understand buttons. Intuitive ( word of the day ) interfaces are KEY. A game can be fun, but it will be MORE FUN if the controls feel right. Joypads have long held the title for ease of use ( though some joypads seem to be TRYING to shake that idea ), and considering they tend to be very versatile if applied right, Im going to have to give this one to joypads hands down. And considering how good voice recognition is getting ( pick up a copy of Dragon Naturally Speaking 7 and train it for a week, youll see ), the future of the keyboard isnt too bright. I doubt theyll be gone too soon, but as it stands, you can replace your keyboard with some decent software. This round goes to the joypad, and by association, the console.

 

Now for the meat and potatoes of the debate ( Im trying to break this puppy down into easier to swallow chunks and important factors ). Gameplay. Ultimately, this is all that matters. However, comparing PC gameplay and console gameplay is VERY difficult to do intelligently. The advent of cross-platform gaming makes it more difficult. In fact, I cant really think of an intelligent way to go about this one, so Im gonna wing it like an opinionated jackass. Works with blogging, so shoot. Great games on the PC are, unfortunetly, few and far between ( GOD PLEASE remember that these are only my OPINIONS. As much as I love being torn-down by 12 year olds with bigger opinions than penises, I... well I dont really like that... ), but consoles, by virtue of there being more consoles than PCs ( PC or Mac vs. Xbox/PS/GameCube/PS2/SNES/Genesis etcetera ), have TONS. My love for video games STARTED with a console. I may not be able to remember what game that was, but damn it, I know it started there. Let me list games I consider great on the console; Crash Bandicoot, almost any Mario game, any Metal Gear game, Resident Evil, blah blah blah. Let me list games I consider great that atleast STARTED unique to the PC; Half-Life. Ummm... F.E.A.R., thats pretty good... same company, though... the Black Isle games, those are good except theyre all the same goddamned game... you get my point. Console game after game has been the new big thing, the biggest selling game ever, so on and so forth, where as really only one game rings as truely monumental to me on the PC, and thats Half-Life, and I still think its over-rated. Yes, I know there are plenty more, Fallout for instance, but the point is there are DEFINETLY a LOT more on the console. If you could only play PC games or only play console games, Im confident most of us would put our stock in the ol' flat box ( console, that is ). That isnt to say there isnt plenty of fun to be had on a PC, especially if you DONT game, or would rather be productive with your life ( clearly not the case if youre reading this ). of course, you can play almost all PC games on a fast PC, but you can ONLY play Xbox games on the Xbox, Snes games on an SNES, so on and so forth. Not to mention you can emulate most PS1 gen and earlier games on a PC, honestly bringing the PC ahead on the gameplay front. But, Im not counting cross-platform. Otherwise we couldve wrapped this puppy up and given it to the PC 5 paragraphs ago. Console = point.

 

A finally, for the sake of shortness which clearly doesnt apply here, support, a catch all word Im going to use for ease of customer support and expandability ( read: expansion packs ). Customer support however, doesnt really work out here because developers provide the customer support, and you call them whether your on the PC OR the console. But, considering the same thing that is having problems can also be used to find a solution ( the PC and the good ol inter-ma-net ). half a point to the PC for being versatile, kind of a cheap half point, but the PC could use it. As for expansion packs, adding content is a field PIONEERED by the PC. "Additional content" is relatively new to the console, but old hat on the PC. This can be a good thing, this can be a bad thing. The option of providing additional content can lead to more than its fair share of developer laziness. Tell someone they only have to finish most of something and they dont usually strive to complete the rest. Look at the mid-90's and the PC. At first, people loved the idea of getting additional levels or weapons for a year old game. But then, for quite some time, the title "expansion pack" became synonomous with "unfinished pile o' sh**" that MIGHT get fixed when the "additional content" comes out. Fortunetly, times have changed, and thats not the case anymore. Now additonal content really is additional. You might have noticed I havent mentioned much about console expansion packs. They exist, the earliest I can think of being the GTA: London add-on for the PS1 ( bet a lot of you were only vaugely familiar with the fact that GTA3 didnt have a "3" in it for shyts and giggles ). But consoles ( until the Xbox ) had lacked hard drives to store the additional content, forcing one to do that which I hate most about PCs ( other than the fact that they are always broken ), disc-swap. Hard drives for consoles are available on a few systems, but costly, sometimes hard to find, and no where near as versatile as the PC kind. The added content tends to be of poorer quality than the PC faire ( though PC expansions are weak in and of themselves, in my opinion ), handing this one over to the PC. Hey look, a whole point!

 

 

 

I know what youre saying now. Looks pretty one-sided right? And now Im supposed to say " ... and the winner is the console. Everyone love the console! Hail the new king!" Not quite. I asked in the beginning "Whos Future Is Brighter?" Im merely expressing here that the gap is closing. Consoles are gaining on the versatile approach of the PC with hard drives and internet connectivity, reclaiming some of their lost ground from back in the good ol days. PCs have been enjoying a nice slice of market share stolen from the console crowd via mass-multiplayer capability and, well, options. Its nice to listen to the music you like while gaming, an option now becoming available to the console crowd ( which it kind of already was in some ways if you owned one of those stereo thingies ).

Now, some of you may have been catching onto something. Ive ( kind of ) excluded cross-platform options because they expose an inevitable truth ( I HOPE ); PCs and consoles are only different platforms for now. Both PCs and consoles are borrowing ideas from the other, closing the gap between the two. Eventually, and Im sure we all already assumed this, we'll be playing all our games on a glorified ( here it comes, PC advocates ) Personal Computer. But hey, consoles are really just specialized PCs anyway, right? Right.

So who wins the debate this time? The console. Whos ultimately going to win by assimilation ( Borg-style, *BLEEP*es )? The personal computer. Which should we love more?

 

The games. F*** the medium.

[Goosestaf 0]

*sigh* lol

 

Well i disagree with alot of what you said. And your opinion is biast as you don't take A LOT into consideration. Mostly the graphics. A high end PC can play CoD2 better and with better graphics than the 360. If you had a HDtv then the 360 would probably look the same, but performance wise, no.

 

And refering to what you said about apds etc. . . .PCs can have Pads, Joysticks Wheels Etc, and Consoels cna have mouse and keyboard.

 

As for sound, it depends on what sound system you have, and what Sound CArd to an extent. If you've got a cheap PC then your not allowed to moan about "my speakers r crap, and sound card isn;'t there", because you have to spend money to get the goods. Its not soemthign you can really debate really, as the programming of sound is essentially the same from Console and PC games, it jsut depends how much you spent on a sound system ( TV or PC)

 

Well it msotly depends to what type of gamer u r and what games u play.

Weither you try n get the msot out of a game, i.e MODS + expansions, Or are just happy with the Vanilla.

 

I personally think that both have their advantages and disadvantages.

This is how is ee it.

 

Consoles

[+] Cheap (compared to equivilent PC)

[+] good for sport games, Adventure games, Driving Games, Fighting games, FPS +RPG i suppose, to an extent

[+] Easy set up, Disk in and play.

[+] Games made for the system so performance should be ok

[+] Smaller (normally)

 

[-] Modding scene nothing like it is on a pc

[-] Fixed graphics and performance (no upgrades)

[-] with all next Gen consoles being able to connect to net, maybe viruses will spread,a dn there would be no way of ridding it off your system.

 

PCs

[+] Great with FPS, RTS, RPG Adgventure.

[+] MODS! + expansions

[+] You can do so much more with a PC

[+] You can always Upgrade

 

[-] Installation + PC Load up time

[-] Viruses Compromising performance possibly

[-] Expensive to get a Top of the range PC /GPU/CPU etc

[-] Performance is dtermined by your system.

 

There all the points i could think of, I myself am an RTS + RPG player and occasionaly FPS, so my choice is obviosuly PC. You tend to apprechiate a PC mroe when you have spent the money and got a good gamming one or built your own. . .. not jsut *BLEEP*ing about how your Dell Inspirion 4200 Doesn't play games good.

[amhso 0]

I think consoles are only good for 2 things...DDR and Racing gamesI like the graphics produced by computers and the sound I (personally) can get. Other people may get better sound out of their TV. Either way, a computer can also do more things and that's the main reason why I love it over the consoles. (Also, I'm too lazy to plug stuff in)

[E-Sector 0]

I strongly disagree with you amhso! In fact, the only Games PC is better than consoles in is First person shooters and strategy games, and we all know that that is becouse that PC uses mouse and keyboard, instead of the clumpsy control stick.But consoles is better in ALL other games! OK, now you will say that PC can have joysticks etc. but they are not as good as for example the Nintendo revolution controller... AND: The revolution controller is BETTER than a Personal computer on first person shooters and strategy games.... Just ask... what is his name... Peter molneux? (the creator of black and white).And the consoles always had better graphics than pc. Ok, the pc's is much stronger in the theory (but not anymore), but look at PS2, the develoeprs optimize it so much that the graphics become as good as the PC games... even if the PS2 just have a 292.32 strong processor (emotion engine) and a PC can have 3.6 GHz processor.... in many game syou need at least a 2.4 GHz processor - the same game runs on PS2's 292 MHz processor without problems, why? That is becouse Windows is running in the background , for example, you see, that Xbox 360 just have 512 MB of RAM! and a PC can have GBytes of ram. A game console is optimized for games, and a PC for work.I can agree that the low specifications of PS2 have done so the PC, GC and Xbox games looks bader than they could look - A multiplatform game always looks worse than a exklusive game- look at one of Xbox exclusive games and compare with a multiplatform- the Xbox game looks better. And this is becouse developers optimeze for PS2 becouse it sell good. Maybe I have wrong on some points, but just remember that PC not is optimized for games! GaMES: Console winsWork: Computer winsOther (DVD, Internet and more): PC wins

[FLaKes 0]

Well the one thing I like a lot about the pc is the mouse. No gaming control can beat the mouse in first person shooter games. The advantage in games the consoles have over pcs, is that the console is a whole lot cheaper than a pc you have to be upgrading every once in a while. Just think about doom3 on the xbox and compare it to the pc. Compare cost, it may not look as good as the pc, but its a whole lot cheaper. I still dont get how they can run it fine on the xbox with a celeron and not on a pc with a better processor and a better video card.

[omego 0]

"without any if or buts" i certainly think that pc gaming is by far better than the consoles, first the quality of some of the games, second: with the pc you can store loads of games at one place without even of to take out a disc etc

[berakd 0]

I belive that future is bright for both of them. Gaming console's function is just one thing. To run games in high frame rates and great picture quality. Computer is again multi-functional product, for work it is very cheap and available for everyone! In the other hand, if you want to play on computer you will have, like now to pay a lot for a fast processor, lot of RAM and good graphic card. Console is equiped for job she is doing. But again if you have a strong PC you can do on him everything. You can draw, write, to use internet, to play, to make money... That is a reason people rather buy a computer than a console. Computer can simulate teh console if you buy joystick, but console can not simulate the computer... My choice is PC, whatever other people thinks!

[special 0]

Pc rocks all, get a controler for your pc. Get a emulator voila all concole games on pc its iligal if you dont have the original kopi of the game if not you may :PSimpel pc pwnz concoles why? all games can be playd on pc buy a controller with a usb hub changer get a xbox360 controller on your pc or nintendo64 etc.

[Knuckles 0]

Pc games are better o/

[iGuest 3]

Most people don't even know that a mid end computer can run better looking games then a crappy console, only stupid kids that have no idea of how to build and configure a pc like those crappy match boxes called "consoles"Consoles are trying so hard to be better then a pc that ...Well they ARE becoming pc's, yes some crappy limited version of computers but as long as console kiddies know "ITS AWESOMEZ0RZZZ"Stupid console kiddies have to admit that CONSOLES ARE FOR KIDS!

[rpgsearcherz 5]

I feel that PC's are better than consoles for multiple reasons.First of all is the fact that you have an open ended choice of what you want to do. You can program, you can play games, you can go online, you can chat, with so many different programs that it would literally be impossible to name them all. Plus you even have the ability to choose what type of operating system that you want to run, which you definitely cannot do with consoles.Next is graphics. Some people claim that consoles have the best graphics, and it is true to a point. Yes Playstation 3 has excellent graphics, but that is because it is using a blue-ray disc reader. If computers had the ability to run Blue-Ray then PC games could hold the same graphical capabilities. The difference is that once a console's graphics start to go down, and the new console comes out, your only choice is to live with the old games or go with a brand new system, which in the case of the PS3 ran $599 new, plus tax. With a PC you have the ability to just go buy a new video card for $50-100 and run the newer games. Not to mention with PC's you don't have to sit around waiting until you can even get AHOLD of one of the newer systems in order to play your favorite games. You can just run to the store and buy your new video card.Along with this is controls, especially in RTS's. Well even to a point, FPS's. Using keyboard and mouse has become second nature to me, and for me to go to consoles for games like Halo is significantly harder because I just don't have the ability to swing my mouse left and right to look quickly, and instead am forced to rely on a little stick.Next is the fact that on the PC you aren't being forced to join things like Microsoft Live or whatever it's called(For the Xbox 360) in order to play games online. The only games online with a PC you have to pay for are MMORPG's, and that's still few and far between as well. I find it ridiculous that you have to pay $50 a year just to play Xbox 360 games online...Or is it $70? I'm not completely sure. Either way, on a PC it's free.Bandwidth usage. There are many different games that on consoles require broadband connections in order to play, and lag horribly. On the PC, however, they can usually be played on dial-up with minimal to no lag. Take Halo for example, for the Xbox. Playing online I almost constantly lagged on a DSL connection. Then playing on the PC I was on my dial-up and could play with up to 8 others without ever lagging, even a little. It doesn't make sense but I'm assuming it has something to do with the consoles and the way that they are set up.With all of these points being taken into consideration, I must say that PC will always prevail over consoles. There are just too many reasons. The only reason to buy consoles would be for the games that are not ported to the PC, such as Final Fantasy 12 and 13, and other games of that nature. Those alone may merit buying a PS3, however I seriously doubt it.One game I regret that I cannot play is Bully, for the PS2...They really need to port that onto the PC, because I would not buy a system just for one game.

[dre 0]

The PC will always be the performance and quality king. If you know what you're doing and you're not running grandma's Pentium 3, then you will be able to build a computer that'll run the latest games at full detail and no lag at all. It surprises me when I visit others with consoles and I see the games lag. I tell em, dude, why is it lagging, and they tell me that it's not. However, I know it is lagging, because I ran the same game on PC and I know what 60+ fps looks like. Also, you can't multitask on a console. Well, perhaps you can, but not even close to the capability of what a PC can do. PC's can run for for weeks and not crash because of overheating (unless you have serious cooling issues), but I hear of burned consoles all the time, because they're built with a craptastic cooling system that most people can't change. Games for consoles cost a ridiculous amount of money, compared to PC games. Worst thing of all, they don't really drop in price either. Next, if I bought myself a game, why the hell should I be paying some stupid Xbox Live just so I can play online? All they probably do anyways is just copy Xfire and set up a couple Pentium 2 servers to connect you to game servers. I never have to do that on a computer.Well, that concludes my opinion about why computers are better than consoles. If you disagree with this, then you're in denial. I've owned both PC's and consoles, and I've built computers myself and played the latest games. I know what I'm talking about.

Edited December 19, 2007 by dre (see edit history)

[demonoider 0]

well, my choice here would have to be pc. i believe that these days, consoles are getting too expensive.i do take into consideration the fact that consoles can usually nowadays to much more than just play games. they can serve as a dvd/blu ray player, music player, video player etc.i also completely realise that online gaming via consoles is becoming more and more popular. however, i do not believe that the console experience is as good as pc gaming.i don't know if it's because my pc is state-of-the-art.... but games just seem to run better on a pc than on a console. also, i really enjoy online gaming, because it gives me the sense that i am not playing alone, and i believe that pcs deliver better online gaming than consoles.however yes, i do agree that pc gaming can only go as far as your computer allows it to. how well the game runs is determined by your computer.