The new xbox console?

I absolutley agree with you on that. As long as they keep bringing decent games out i will be relatively happy.

And yeah pc's will always out perform any console. Goes without saying.
 
kimps_07 said:
I absolutley agree with you on that. As long as they keep bringing decent games out i will be relatively happy.

And yeah pc's will always out perform any console. Goes without saying.
Click to expand...

:) I just think that the graphics and sound are at a high enough quality at the moment already. I can't really afford to run an uber powerful PC that can destroy any and all games which is why I choose consoles to play on. They cost considerable amounts less than a PC and you can get Xbox's now for less than the price of a decent mid range graphics card. Sure, the games don't usually have as high quality on the consoles as they do on the PC's, but the quality is still there, it's just not as high. Take GTA4 for instance, this may be bad example because people have had bad experiences on consoles with it, but I find that on my 360 it runs perfectly fine, I can't say I've experienced noticeable slowdown and to me it looks very pretty indeed. To get it to run at that level of detail on a PC I can safely say that I'd have to spend more than the £140 my Xbox cost. Nowadays £140 would probably get me a Radeon 4870 and that's about it. Not much use in a box on it's own really.

For me consoles are about the convenience of being able to stick a game in and be playing with seconds. With a PC it just offers too much hassle for me even though there is no doubt that they are capable of much higher graphical quality than any consoles that are out on the market at the moment. Also, as I said just now, I'm not sitting around getting fed up of waiting for the next gen because there's a pretty big backlist of games that I still haven't played from this generation. Not to mention all of the up and coming releases of this fall / winter, and a few of the great games that are being touted for release early next year too! :D
 
K1LLSW1TCH said:
:) I just think that the graphics and sound are at a high enough quality at the moment already. I can't really afford to run an uber powerful PC that can destroy any and all games which is why I choose consoles to play on. They cost considerable amounts less than a PC and you can get Xbox's now for less than the price of a decent mid range graphics card. Sure, the games don't usually have as high quality on the consoles as they do on the PC's, but the quality is still there, it's just not as high. Take GTA4 for instance, this may be bad example because people have had bad experiences on consoles with it, but I find that on my 360 it runs perfectly fine, I can't say I've experienced noticeable slowdown and to me it looks very pretty indeed. To get it to run at that level of detail on a PC I can safely say that I'd have to spend more than the £140 my Xbox cost. Nowadays £140 would probably get me a Radeon 4870 and that's about it. Not much use in a box on it's own really.

For me consoles are about the convenience of being able to stick a game in and be playing with seconds. With a PC it just offers too much hassle for me even though there is no doubt that they are capable of much higher graphical quality than any consoles that are out on the market at the moment. Also, as I said just now, I'm not sitting around getting fed up of waiting for the next gen because there's a pretty big backlist of games that I still haven't played from this generation. Not to mention all of the up and coming releases of this fall / winter, and a few of the great games that are being touted for release early next year too! :D
Click to expand...
Yeah id prefer to play a game with joypad rather than using a bloody mouse and keyboard. They've brought some monster games out for the pc mind. Crysis was brillaint. Graphics were phenominal. Consoles are without a doubt ridiculously cheaper aswell. I paid 800 quid for my p.c along with a 450 quid monitor, which i'm more than happy with. But as far as gaming goes. I'l stick to my xbox. Much better community, gamerscore ;) and easier to adapt to. :)
 
Alpherah said:
And if PC's cant manage far superior gfx in a ~£2000 box, how the hell are console devs supposed to manage it for a new £~300 device?
Click to expand...

bibalasvegas said:
I have a pc and a ps3 and can tell you that relatively cheap pcs can and do outperform the ps3 quite easily.
Click to expand...

He said far superior and I agree with him. Console ports that require a side-by-side to notice most of the differences arn't much fun. They might be better but they arn't of a different generation and one thats worth building a console around.
 
K1LLSW1TCH said:
:) I just think that the graphics and sound are at a high enough quality at the moment already. I can't really afford to run an uber powerful PC that can destroy any and all games which is why I choose consoles to play on. They cost considerable amounts less than a PC and you can get Xbox's now for less than the price of a decent mid range graphics card. Sure, the games don't usually have as high quality on the consoles as they do on the PC's, but the quality is still there, it's just not as high. Take GTA4 for instance, this may be bad example because people have had bad experiences on consoles with it, but I find that on my 360 it runs perfectly fine, I can't say I've experienced noticeable slowdown and to me it looks very pretty indeed. To get it to run at that level of detail on a PC I can safely say that I'd have to spend more than the £140 my Xbox cost. Nowadays £140 would probably get me a Radeon 4870 and that's about it. Not much use in a box on it's own really.

For me consoles are about the convenience of being able to stick a game in and be playing with seconds. With a PC it just offers too much hassle for me even though there is no doubt that they are capable of much higher graphical quality than any consoles that are out on the market at the moment. Also, as I said just now, I'm not sitting around getting fed up of waiting for the next gen because there's a pretty big backlist of games that I still haven't played from this generation. Not to mention all of the up and coming releases of this fall / winter, and a few of the great games that are being touted for release early next year too! :D
Click to expand...

Good post, +1.
 
Which console does everyone prefer. I don't want to start a war over this so just answer with either:

Xbox
or
ps3(****) JOKING!
 
IMO the longer it takes for there to be a new Xbox or Playstation then the better (within reason) I think about another 5 years would be good becasue once they release it, thats it for another 5-7 years. The consoles out now are both impressive. They are still getting better as did the PS1 and SNES etc. Some of the later SNES games were twice as impressive as the early ones. If they were to release a PS4 now, all it would have would be the same CPU (or maybe 200MHz faster, an 8800 GTX and an extra 512mb RAM. Woop-e-doo. Yes it would be better but half the games would be identical and the average man on the steet isn't into studying side-by-side videos of each version to spot the difference. Small bumps in performance are what PCs are for. It wouldn't sell a console. The XBOX or Playstation name would be be tarnished if they released a new console now/soon. The next gen might not even be directX based. Now is the time to just play games :cool:
 
bibalasvegas said:
lmao. This is probably the most ridiculous post I've ever read on these forums!!! You clearly don't know anything. I have a pc and a ps3 and can tell you that relatively cheap pcs can and do outperform the ps3 quite easily.
Click to expand...

what do you mean by cheap - by pc standards or console standards?

You havent been able to get a graphics card for a pc to play the quality of games on a console (at that resolution) for under the cost of either console - then think of mobo / cpu / psu / /ram / case......it soon adds up

Cheap by pc standards maybe - but that could easily be £1000 or there abouts - which is four times the cost of a ps3 and around 5 times the cost of a x360 premium

.....then ask that same pc to last for the same length of time as the consoles with recently released games with the same quality, then you are probably going to have to spend a good £300 or more on it ontop

two sides to every story - his statement wasnt that far off as you want to seem to believe ;)
 
I'm sure you could build a PC under 500 pounds that would easily out perform the PS3 and 360. A PC in a Media Center case under a HDTV wouldn't look out of place. So you could knock buying a monitor of the price straight away.

mame said:
:confused:

(720° would still leave you facing the same way:p)
Click to expand...

Guess going to the counter and spinning around in a full circle would still make one look like a plonka. :D
 
Last edited:
High end PC's were already as good as the consoles when the consoles were released this generation, were they not?

Also I'd have thought the reason games dont look hugely better on the PC is because most games arent MADE for the pc. Developers are now focusing on the consoles bc of better money or piracy or w/e.

A game made for PC and then ported to console would be, graphically, far (okay maybe not FAR superior but it would be better) superior to either console on even a £500 PC. The only benefit a console has is that it can be optimised a lot better.
 
FrankJH said:
what do you mean by cheap - by pc standards or console standards?

You havent been able to get a graphics card for a pc to play the quality of games on a console (at that resolution) for under the cost of either console - then think of mobo / cpu / psu / /ram / case......it soon adds up

Cheap by pc standards maybe - but that could easily be £1000 or there abouts - which is four times the cost of a ps3 and around 5 times the cost of a x360 premium

.....then ask that same pc to last for the same length of time as the consoles with recently released games with the same quality, then you are probably going to have to spend a good £300 or more on it ontop

two sides to every story - his statement wasnt that far off as you want to seem to believe ;)
Click to expand...

Good post. :)

People seem to forget how long the consoles have to last, and for such a small price too when compared to a PC that could run the same games at the same or better resolutions and with the same level of detail. Somebody said about putting a Media Center PC underneath a TV. It wouldn't look out of place, but it wouldn't be ideal for gaming, and in my opinion it wouldn't be as suitable for quick gaming sessions as consoles. You still have to boot up Windows and launch the game, which will take longer than just being able to turn the console on and launch a game. Then there's the added hassle of updates and drivers. Plus, sitting on a sofa or a comfy chair with a control pad in your hand is much more comfortable than sitting at a desk hunched over a keyboard or a mouse, it is for me anyway. I'm not bashing the PC though, it is technically way above the consoles in terms of audio/visual quality, but as I said in an earlier post it's all about accessibility and ease of use. If you give a kid the choice of being able to buy a copy of COD4, bung it in the machine and be online within a matter of moments, or the choice to have to install it, update it, update punkbuster, create a login name for that specific game, alter and tailor all the visual settings to the computers capabilities, bind all keys, and then finally play... I think they'd choose the former over the latter. But that's just a very quick example.

PC gaming and the consoles both have their pro's and con's and at the end of the day it's all about what the end user requires. :)
 
The reason for it being called a 360 was so that is wasn't numerically inferior to the playstation three, and the code/dev name for the now nintendo wii was the revolution, which of course is 360 degrees
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom