PC to Console Gamer?

[betan]

I switched from PC to console a few months ago, but still play on PC time to time.
The main reasons were boredom, burdens of PC gaming, having to boot to Windows, etc.
Plust, there was a great library of "exclusive" PS2 games I ignored, but felt I would enjoy.

It has been mostly great for me, Unlike others, I actually like the controller even for an FPS (Resistance in particular). On PC too, I mostly target by strafe so lack of mouse is not a big issue.
Besides Resistance however, first-person or over-the-shoulder shooting parts of any game I played sucked, except maybe for sniping.
Interestingly it's not necessarily due to absence of fast precision aiming, but the resulting purposely slowed down pacing. I felt the same way for Halo:CE on PC and I'm afraid UT3 may suffer too, apparently it will be slower on PS3 than PC.

 

[Pozer]

Currently a console gamers for 2 reasons.


1) I work in the IT field and hate to come home and sit in front of a PC.
2) PC gaming has lost alot the depth I use to enjoy in computer games. (simulations, etc.) Games that required a full keyboard and not WADS.


I also have a long history of jumping from consoles and PC's and back.

Atari VCS -----> Adam Computer
Adam PC -----> Sega Master System
SMS -----> Commodore64
C64 ------> Genesis
Genesis ------> Amiga
Amiga ------> IBM PC 486
PC 486 ------> Playstation1
PS1 ------> Pentium w/ 3dfx voodoo
Geforce4------> Xbox1
Xbox1 ------> Xbox360

Currently awaiting the resurgence of deep PC gaming. Why should i pay $2000 for a console experience on PC when a $400 360 is cheaper. I truly belive PC gaming is in a funk right now and looks to be for awhile.

 

[MrFloopy]

Have to say I have finally and at the time begrudgingly moved to consoles. I was PC all the way (what I developed on so made sense). I was one of those people that used to giggle uncontrollably when console fans raved about goldeneye being the pinnacle of gaming (and I still do).

But due to:

Pc being in study and console being next to comfy couch.
Xbox live
Some great games
Young family and mortgage giving less time and funds
Everyone at work's relentless pestering
Spending large amounts of my work time staring at console dev kits

I am now a console tragic.

 

[D3v0ur3r]

I was playing some Halo3 Slayer last night with my two 6 year old boys (that's twins) & we were have a great time. It should have occurred to me that a DM game would be the best way to adapt fastly to a new setup. Even if it was against 6 year olds. They are pretty good at most any game as well as have a ton more practice with the 360 controller then me. They each have a 360 controller for there comps as well.

Bottom line is I can't afford proper computer upgrades around here right now so its going to be console action for the foreseeable future. Might as well dig in. I did roll the dice & ordered the XFPS Pro. So I hope I don't get burned yet again & the thing actually works this time.

 

[pjbliverpool]

For me its the fiddling around with hardware and tweaking settings that makes PC gaming more enjoyable. Each platform has advantages over the other but without the above gaming as a whole is pretty boring to me. I bought a 360 almost 2 years ago now but it only really gets used when I have friends around, 95% of my personal gaming is still PC based.

As I see it, the high level advantages of each are:

PC:

• Better graphics, system allowing
• More customizable, (hardware, games and setup)
• Better choice of controls

Console:

• Easier to use if you lack knowledge in the PC space
• Can be cheaper in many instances - but not all
• Wider variety of genres
• Better same room multi player

I could go into great detail for each of those points but suffice to say that the PC advantages appeal to me moreso than the console ones but the console advantages have more of a mass market appeal.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

PC:

• Better graphics, system allowing
• More customizable, (hardware, games and setup)
• Better choice of controls

Console:

• Easier to use if you lack knowledge in the PC space
• Can be cheaper in many instances - but not all
• Wider variety of genres
• Better same room multi player

Add to that console list 'easier to use even if you have the knowledge in the PC space but don't want to spend time tweaking stuff! I'm also hesitant to say PC games have better graphics. In top-title genres, specifically First Person (Shooters) than it has the advantage, but in the less 'hardcore' PC genres it graphics tend to be very subdued, not least because developers target previous generation hardware. eg. Compare Dungeon Siege 2 on PC to CON on PS2 - the latter, apart from resolution, looks way better. No amount of PC hardware is going to make DSII look good because the developers haven't included support for high-end features, or even things like multiple dynamic light sources.

Thus if choosing between PC and console, one serious consideration IMO is the type of games you want to play. If they're shooters, PC will tend to have the advantage. Not sure about racers. A lot of games just don't target your big, expensive GPUs though, and all you'll get for your money is higher resolution and AA+AF, which are no compensation for artistry or optimal targeting of the hardware features.

 

[TheChefO]

I have typically bounced back to pc gaming only when console graphics start getting old/dated toward the end of their lifecycle.

Ps1 to pc was right around the time voodoo came out.
Then to DC
Then xb
Then back to PC around the time doom 3 came out
Then xb360

At this point, I'm not sure if I'm ever going back to pc gaming. I have to many other things in life to do than mess with a pc. As long as the thing works, I'm happy. If I later get bored with my xb360 ... maybe I'll pickup a ps3... that is, unless xb720 comes out before then...

 

[TheChefO]

Add to that console list 'easier to use even if you have the knowledge in the PC space but don't want to spend time tweaking stuff! I'm also hesitant to say PC games have better graphics. In top-title genres, specifically First Person (Shooters) than it has the advantage, but in the less 'hardcore' PC genres it graphics tend to be very subdued, not least because developers target previous generation hardware. eg. Compare Dungeon Siege 2 on PC to CON on PS2 - the latter, apart from resolution, looks way better. No amount of PC hardware is going to make DSII look good because the developers haven't included support for high-end features, or even things like multiple dynamic light sources.

Thus if choosing between PC and console, one serious consideration IMO is the type of games you want to play. If they're shooters, PC will tend to have the advantage. Not sure about racers. A lot of games just don't target your big, expensive GPUs though, and all you'll get for your money is higher resolution and AA+AF, which are no compensation for artistry or optimal targeting of the hardware features.

QFT.

Pc's have been way too low poly for too long. The other point about games not using the high end hardware (especially not efficiently) is very true as well. High end PC gaming is a waste of time and money IMO .... unless you need that high end pc for other business.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Add to that console list 'easier to use even if you have the knowledge in the PC space but don't want to spend time tweaking stuff!

Fair enough, what I meant by that is if you know what your doing with a PC and you set it up correctly, your day to day gaming can actually be a much simpler affair than console gaming. E.g, my PC is on most of the time, all my games are set up to perfection with no CD hacks. Playing a game on my PC is as simple as going to the games menu and clicking the appropriate one. When i'm finished, I just close it down and i'm back on the desktop ready to start the next game. No long loading times, no messing around with disks and no setup issues.

However I concede that the PC doesn't come like that out of the box! There is a level of effort required to make the experience so seamless. In my expereince though, if you know what your doing, that level of effort is minimal and not necessarily greater than having to get up, turn my console on, put in the correct disk, turn the TV over etc.... every time I want to play a new game. Some may scoff and say "you call that effort"? My answer is, compared to clicking on my start menu, yes it is!

I'm also hesitant to say PC games have better graphics. In top-title genres, specifically First Person (Shooters) than it has the advantage, but in the less 'hardcore' PC genres it graphics tend to be very subdued, not least because developers target previous generation hardware. eg. Compare Dungeon Siege 2 on PC to CON on PS2 - the latter, apart from resolution, looks way better. No amount of PC hardware is going to make DSII look good because the developers haven't included support for high-end features, or even things like multiple dynamic light sources.

Thus if choosing between PC and console, one serious consideration IMO is the type of games you want to play. If they're shooters, PC will tend to have the advantage. Not sure about racers. A lot of games just don't target your big, expensive GPUs though, and all you'll get for your money is higher resolution and AA+AF, which are no compensation for artistry or optimal targeting of the hardware features.

As you say, that depends on the type of game you want to play but I think I covered that in the advantage I gave to consoles regarding the wider genres. In fact they don't have a wider selection of genres, its just that the PC's contributions in those less popular genres (on the PC) are generally old, or low budget games.

Looking at the PC's AAA titles or most cross platform titles, the PC usually has the graphical advantage. If it didn't, I wouldn't be a PC gamer since that was my top advantage for it

And its the AAA titles and cross platformers that interest me the most. Its also those that DO very much put the stress on high end hardware. Perhaps not fully taking advantage of them in a balanced way like a console game might, but in no way are they a waste for the upper echelon of PC games. Hell, I have a GTS 640 and I can only manage to play a small percentage of my current "in use" games at my monitors native resolution of 1920x1200

 

[pjbliverpool]

QFT.

Pc's have been way too low poly for too long. The other point about games not using the high end hardware (especially not efficiently) is very true as well. High end PC gaming is a waste of time and money IMO .... unless you need that high end pc for other business.

But try playing many of the top tier games at 1080p + AA/AF and see how far you get with none high end hardware.

Sure 1080p and AA/AF may not appeal to you but that doesn't mean no-one cares about them. Hell, even console gamers talk about those topics a lot these days, mostly bigging it up when the odd game does run at 1080p or wistfully wishing that a particular game had better AA/AF. One of the points of high end PC gaming is to actually go and spend money to get those things rather than just wishing the devs had implemented them.

 

[TheChefO]

But try playing many of the top tier games at 1080p + AA/AF and see how far you get with none high end hardware.

Sure 1080p and AA/AF may not appeal to you but that doesn't mean no-one cares about them. Hell, even console gamers talk about those topics a lot these days, mostly bigging it up when the odd game does run at 1080p or wistfully wishing that a particular game had better AA/AF. One of the points of high end PC gaming is to actually go and spend money to get those things rather than just wishing the devs had implemented them.

I'm sure many more gamers feel the same way you do. That's why I said, "IMO".

The gain just isn't worth it to me anymore.

 

[Arwin]

Playing a game on my PC is as simple as going to the games menu and clicking the appropriate one. When i'm finished, I just close it down and i'm back on the desktop ready to start the next game. No long loading times, no messing around with disks and no setup issues.

Lot of games on my PS3 are like that these days too though. Warhawk, Tekken, Super Stardust, lots of game demos, are all on the 'desktop' (XMB) ... I'm spending more time in games on the harddisk these days than on disc - though that too works just fine - just put the disc in and press x, and off you go. And hey, the slot loader on the PS3 works very nice for taking out discs with its sleek touch eject button and slot loader/disc cleaner combo ...

Even better, you don't have to actually turn on the PS3 - if you try to put a disc in it, it will turn itself on.

It's typically the games that bring me back to the PC though. Whenever the PC offers me a game that I cannot get a similar experience on the consoles for, that's when I go back to PC. But that's been happening less and less for me. F1C and GTR 2002 mods brought me back for a while, and Warcraft 3 before that, but since then nothing. But that could easily change, you never know when something really cool and new shows up and I want PC gaming again. For now though, the consoles look like they'll be very hot for the next few years.

 

[Neb]

QFT.

Pc's have been way too low poly for too long. The other point about games not using the high end hardware (especially not efficiently) is very true as well. High end PC gaming is a waste of time and money IMO .... unless you need that high end pc for other business.

Nah PC's have been pulling lots of polygons since time ago and even tweaking the LOD's to up the polygon levels even more has a small perfomance hit. I would even say PC's have used higher poly games than competition for a long time, also noticeable in the lack of aggressive LOD settings compared to other platforms.
And as a high-end PC can play games at high-res and AA/AF at high levels, when more demanding games comes out the res has to be lowered but it will still manange to run the games fluid even at above 720p res.

And surprisingly how my previous single core CPU 3200+ could emulate Vista x64 vm, run Vista x86 vm, WinXP home vm and host OS at the same time with not even 30% CPU time usage with each doing it's work! (power using FTW !)

 

[cthellis42]

I did roll the dice & ordered the XFPS Pro. So I hope I don't get burned yet again & the thing actually works this time.

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much. My friend ordered one of those recently, and while it works, he's pretty frustrated with the mouse lag and inaccuracy. He "deals" with it because he has to (not that he DID "have to" of course, but for some reason he thought he did ), but I don't suspect he'll be doing much more than play Bioshock on the 360, and otherwise use it for his arcade stick.

 

[dobwal]

Hello all.

A couple questions that have been occupying space in my mind. Firstly, I am curious if anyone else is starting to move away from PC gaming to more console gaming?

I seem to be but part of that is due to finding myself in a situation currently where upgrading my PC (which is in need of) is an impossibility. Its just cheaper for me to buy 360 games (for the most in visuals) since we have one. The problem is I am a huge FPS fan & I really suck at using a controller for FPS games. I know there is a learning curve just as there was years ago to play with Keys & Mouse but even still I know the keys & mouse are superior so it makes the will to adjust little. So here is what I am looking at. UT3 for the PS3 is supposed to allow K/M play which I am hoping it wouldn't be the only console game to finally support K/M play on "next gen" consoles. So buying a PS3 is still cheaper then upgrading my comp & honestly if I could get K/M play on the console I might just switch permanently for the foreseeable future.

Does anyone think that after UT3 for the PS3 is out & God willing a couple more FPS game for the PS3. That MS will finally add support for K/M in the 360?

Edit: Found a petition for the KB/M on the 360 if anyone cares. http://www.petitiononline.com/x360kbm/petition.html

Console gaming lead me to PC gaming in the early 90s. I PC gamed heavily over the 90s because I was attracted by the added complexity with some genres such as RTS, domination of online multiplayer gaming and having better graphics in general. However, the number of exclusive PC titles that I find interesting dwindles every year to the point that now Crysis alone is just not enough to warrant further upgrades to my PC.

The better aspects of the K/M controls isn't enough to dissuade me from buying the console version of a title available on the PC. I just forced myself to deal with the negative aspects of a controller and got better at utilizing it when gaming.

 

[D3v0ur3r]

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much. My friend ordered one of those recently, and while it works, he's pretty frustrated with the mouse lag and inaccuracy. He "deals" with it because he has to (not that he DID "have to" of course, but for some reason he thought he did ), but I don't suspect he'll be doing much more than play Bioshock on the 360, and otherwise use it for his arcade stick.

Did he get the XFPS 360, or the XFPS 360 Pro? I've got the first one & that was a waste of $80.00. I do not have much hope that this (XFPS 360 pro) will work all that well but its worth a try I guess for the sheer reason that I'll know & not have to always wonder.

Jeez man. You would think that after paying the high cost of these so called "next gen" consoles which are supposed to be so fabulous that they would have at least given the owners/players a choice of either KB/M or controller. If its a per game option then it doesn't seem like it would be to hard to force only the KB/M players playing only KB/M players online & controller players only playing controller players. Simple selection of either controller before joining a game, join certain servers & have the option to switch controllers locked when in game. Seems like a simple solution to me. How many PC players would soon jump at this? No question I certainly would & PC gaming would be a fond memory. & after you force KB/M players playing only KB/M servers, guess what? You can now allow PC to console play. WAKE THE HELL UP MS!

Will be very interesting to see how Epic deal with this issue (KB/M & Controller play) on the PS3.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Did he get the XFPS 360, or the XFPS 360 Pro? I've got the first one & that was a waste of $80.00. I do not have much hope that this (XFPS 360 pro) will work all that well but its worth a try I guess for the sheer reason that I'll know & not have to always wonder.

Jeez man. You would think that after paying the high cost of these so called "next gen" consoles which are supposed to be so fabulous that they would have at least given the owners/players a choice of either KB/M or controller. If its a per game option then it doesn't seem like it would be to hard to force only the KB/M players playing only KB/M players online & controller players only playing controller players. Simple selection of either controller before joining a game, join certain servers & have the option to switch controllers locked when in game. Seems like a simple solution to me. How many PC players would soon jump at this? No question I certainly would & PC gaming would be a fond memory. & after you force KB/M players playing only KB/M servers, guess what? You can now allow PC to console play. WAKE THE HELL UP MS!

Will be very interesting to see how Epic deal with this issue (KB/M & Controller play) on the PS3.

Problem is that a KB/M simply doesn't work very well on a couch which is the typical console usage model. Its not really worth console devs supporting it given the extra work that has to go into accomodaing 2 control types.

There seems to be quite a strong sentiment that PC exclusives are dwindling and thus console gaming is becoming an increasingly better option however I think the same is true of console exclusives. Certainly more console games are coming to PC this generation than they did last gen and the genres actually seem to be opening up a little on PC aswell. Add to that how many games go multi platform and it seems to be a pretty obvious industry trend fed by higher game development costs thats only likely to increase in the future.

So the question should be, which platform is the best to play these multi platform games on? For me its PC but thats because I can afford to spend a lot of time customising my PC to perfection and spending a decent amount of money on it (say around £300 per year average).

If you have the money to spend, and you don't mind, or even enjoy the tweaking (as I do) then IMO the PC is clearly the better choice for most multiplatform games. If on the other hand your on a limited budget and/or don't like having to tweak your games and system then consoles are generally the better choice. It is worth noting though that the budget conscious may want to consider low-medium end PC gaming over console gaming due to the large difference in game prices. The difference between a new PC and PS3 game these days can easily be $20 a go. At that rate 10 games a year would be worth a medium range GPU upgrade every year.

 

[AlphaWolf]

If you have the money to spend, and you don't mind, or even enjoy the tweaking (as I do) then IMO the PC is clearly the better choice for most multiplatform games. If on the other hand your on a limited budget and/or don't like having to tweak your games and system then consoles are generally the better choice. It is worth noting though that the budget conscious may want to consider low-medium end PC gaming over console gaming due to the large difference in game prices. The difference between a new PC and PS3 game these days can easily be $20 a go. At that rate 10 games a year would be worth a medium range GPU upgrade every year.

It's not just the money its the time. Everytime I load up a new pc game it seems I can look forward to wasting 30 minutes or more on drivers etc. And even if I get it loaded I can often look forward to checking forums to resolve various issues and patching. For me that's all time wasted, time I don't enjoy, time that reminds me that my couch and console beckons. Worst case scenario on a console is a bios update requiring a restart (which takes seconds).

 

[pjbliverpool]

It's not just the money its the time. Everytime I load up a new pc game it seems I can look forward to wasting 30 minutes or more on drivers etc. And even if I get it loaded I can often look forward to checking forums to resolve various issues and patching. For me that's all time wasted, time I don't enjoy, time that reminds me that my couch and console beckons. Worst case scenario on a console is a bios update requiring a restart (which takes seconds).

See this is one argument I have never understood. Never (ok, very rarely) have I had to go out and install a new driver, or a patch before I can play a game on my PC. 9 times out of 10 you put the game in, it installs, and then it works. I'll spend quite a bit of time playing with settings to get the perfect combination of performance and visuals but thats just a personal preference. The defaults will run just fine in almost every instance.

But even if it does take 30mins just to get the game working the first time you play, is that really such a big deal? How many times do you start up and play a game? 10? 20? 30? Generally PC games have shorter loading times on a decent PC. So you waste 30mins the first time you play and the other 10-30 times you save a minute or so per play on loading times. Or in my case, the not having to put the disk in, wait for the console to boot up, find the right channel on my TV etc... Thats all wasted time to me.

 

[D3v0ur3r]

Problem is that a KB/M simply doesn't work very well on a couch which is the typical console usage model.

I've read where many people have the 360 hooked up to a monitor at there desk. People could also use a board or other flat surface on there lap. Its not to hard to figure out if it what you prefer. Which is why I said it should have been the players option from day one. As it is currently for all 360 games I am pretty much forced to play the game with a controller even though I personally dislike controllers.

I wonder how well people would receive games if they were always forced to do what the developer wanted them to do. Doom 3 being my main example. I can't even begin to count the amount of bitching posts about not being able to use the flashlight & weapon at the same time so within say two weeks there was suddenly multiple flashlight mods. I wonder how people would have reacted if id had made D3 so absolutely no mods would have been allowed. As well as many other PC games.

Edit: & suppose the complete horror it would be if PC players were suddenly forced to use controllers for all PC games so it made ports easier for the Devs. I don't buy the couch BS excuse at all.