Am I missing something here?

AdladUK said:
The funny thing is that once you've paid for the screen, console, games, Live sub, you're talking £600-£700, not £200.

Anyways I give up. Not sure what I'm gonna do with it at the moment. Will test a Blu-ray on the screen soon, if it's awesome I'll scrap the 360, if it's crap I'll just run the console on a HDMI supported monitor
Click to expand...

No you're not.

My Dad could go and buy a Console and Reach today and it would cost him less than £200.

He already has a TV.

:confused:
 
Last edited:
Well its a bit stupid saying a £1k PC isn't better than a £200 console, and I've played consoles for years :rolleyes:

Can't see a £200 PC beating a £200 console mind :p , which is basically why consoles are so popular. They do what they are suposed to do at an affordable price. Plus some people struggle to set up a console so how are they going to build a PC :D

Anyway, halo has never been the pinnacle of graphics. I remember my opinion of halo3 was that it had cartoon like graphics. (or 'artistic' if you are a die hard halo fanboy trying to defend it :o). So the halo games are played for their gameplay, whether or not you agree it has great gameplay is another matter though.
 
i-bert said:
No you're not.

My Dad could go and buy a Console and Reach today and it would cost him less than £200.

He already has a TV.

:confused:
Click to expand...

Who said anything about your dad?

I'm talking about my situation. I did not own a TV before purchasing a 360. Once you add everything up you're talking £600-£700, not £200. That's from a position of having nothing to game with and comparing it with buying a £1,000 PC (including monitor)
 
I have a good pc, a 360 and a PS3,

I use my pc to play pc games, starcraft 2 and wow are all I have played in months,

The 360 is used for most other games, I get everything multi format on it and graphics have never been a problem, It does run lower res than my pc but when sitting 8ft+ away from the screen it looks just as good

and the PS3 is a decent blu-ray player which plays the odd exclusive, I haven't run a game on it since uncharted 2 came out,

I do like playing games on the pc but it is so much more comfortable and connecting to live and playing with friends is easier. I was a hardcore pc gamer until I bought the 360 and when I first got it I preferred PC but I have come to love the 360 for what it is
 
Oh dear. Your years of playing PC games has obviously meant you've got very used to higher resolutions and higher textures etc...

Which is fine..

But the xbox360 isn't rubbish gfx but compared to what you've been playing for many years, it wasn't ever going to blow you out the water.

I remember getting an xbox360 for forza 3, and then I got lent a copy of Project Gotham Racing 4. The gfx on that when compared to DiRT2 on my PC were pretty poor, but then I was playing a DX11 1920 x 1080 ultra high settings game on the PC in my sig...

I too had the xbox360 plugged into my HDMI 1080p TFT that I use for my PC.

Took the xbox360 downstairs to my living room and hooked it up to my HDMI Media AMP and played PGR4 on my 42" panny plasma sitting a good few feet away - it looked amazing, soon as I walked up close to the screen, again it looked naff.

Problem with games consoles is that the tech is always a lot further behind then a PC.

TBH, as you're a PC Gamer, PS3 might have been a better choice, a lot more exclusives on that machine then the 360 compared to a PC. A lot of 360 titles end up on PC.

PS3 BTW isn't any better gfx wise when compared to a uber £1500 PC. But the PS3 has some good games such as God of War III, Uncharted 2, killzone 2 and heavy rain etc....

for a games console you need to sit a bit further away from the screen...

Being a PC gamer myself - I fully understand why he states the xbox360 isn't all that.. Sadly, its true, but the console isn't rubbish. Just lower the expectation and sit further away and enjoy your new console....
 
AdladUK said:
Who said anything about your dad?

I'm talking about my situation. I did not own a TV before purchasing a 360. Once you add everything up you're talking £600-£700, not £200. That's from a position of having nothing to game with and comparing it with buying a £1,000 PC (including monitor)
Click to expand...

If you spent £700 on a 360 a cheap branded 32" LCD then you were ripped.

:p
 
I agree with sunama and the OP. I'm a graphics whore too and have no interest in playing a game if it looks crap (graphics > gameplay) so I'll be waiting a few weeks for Reach to come out on the PC :cool:
 
Last edited:
i-bert said:
If you spent £700 on a 360 a cheap branded 32" LCD then you were ripped.

:p
Click to expand...

Really? You can't work it out?

Xbox - £200
TV - £250
Couple of games - £80
Live sub (1 year) - £40

Total = £570

That's as you say a "cheap branded" TV (which there were over 130 5 star ratings for).

It would have been very easy for me to spend an extra 50 or 100 quid on the same size screen, hence my £600-£700 figure
 
AdladUK said:
Really? You can't work it out?

Xbox - £200
TV - £250
Couple of games - £80
Live sub (1 year) - £40

Total = £570

That's as you say a "cheap branded" TV (which there were over 130 5 star ratings for).

It would have been very easy for me to spend an extra 50 or 100 quid on the same size screen, hence my £600-£700 figure
Click to expand...

Don't forget a fiver for a HDMI lead.

Oh and another £9.99 for a play n charge kit for the controller. MS were too cheap to include a way to charge your controller and include a HDMI lead into the package...

lol Adding further to the cost.
 
iv-tecman said:
Being a PC gamer myself - I fully understand why he states the xbox360 isn't all that.. Sadly, its true, but the console isn't rubbish. Just lower the expectation and sit further away and enjoy your new console....
Click to expand...

Yeah that all makes sense. I was actually getting used to play RDR on my 23" before I got the new screen. It wasn't great, but playable. Now it's just ridiculous.

I'm sure like you say if I position myself 10FT away it will be reasonable again. Rather sad tho huh, you need to sit so far away just to get acceptable graphics
 
To all those who are saying that the graphics on consoles is dire....well it's not THAT bad now is it?

Yes its nothing compared to a mid/high range PC using todays hardware but at the same time it is still in HD (or close to for them upscaled games) and it's a hell of a lot better looking than SD content. As has been said, you're buying 5 year old hardware that at the time probably did just about compare with PC's but hasn't got a chance today.

Enjoy the console for the convenience and the hyped story in some of the exclusives rather than the 'lesser quality than PC but still much better than SD' graphics. I know I much prefer gaming on a console than my PC now days mainly because I don't have to be stuck at my desk for hours on end :)
 
EezerGoode said:
Do yourself a favor and send that rubbish TV back and spend the money on a decent camera.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

And what 32" TV would you suggest without blowing £500?

This model had a TON of excellent reviews, and I've just watched 5 minutes of a movie on it now and it looks awesome.

So yeah, do you have some basis/experience to what you said? Or is it just because it doesn't have a Samsung logo on it?
 
For a console that's almost 5 years old I think the graphics are pretty good.
I'll take good gameplay over graphics any day.
 
AdladUK said:
That's as you say a "cheap branded" TV (which there were over 130 5 star ratings for).
Click to expand...

AdladUK. I understand that. You understand that. But unfortunately, there are people who are not "techies" and believe that if a TV does not carry a big brand name tag, that it absolutely must be "crap".

These are also the same people who believe that all 1080p LCD TVs are superior to 720p plasmas.

Guys, the TV he has bought is fine. There is nothing wrong with it. If I had to buy an LCD TV today, then I would probably either go for the one he has bought or one those which are on offer for around £250. This is coming from someone who owns a Panasonic 42" plasma and a Panasonic HD Projector, costing over £1k.

I've seen whats out there and believe me at HD resolutions, on a console, whether you use an el-cheapo LCD (with high ratings) or the cream of the crop Pioneer Kuros, at a given screen size, you will notice little difference when it comes to console gaming. The Pioneer will pull ahead on SD images and Blu-Ray images.

I never realised until today that the fan boys, just dont want to take no for answer. To argue that a £200 console can match the peformance of a mid/high end PC, is silly.

I'm actually gobsmacked that the TV is now being blamed.
 
cokecan72 said:
I know I much prefer gaming on a console than my PC now days mainly because I don't have to be stuck at my desk for hours on end :)
Click to expand...
I don't really have a preference for device more for game type. Still play the majority of RTS, RPG and FPS games on my PC because of the keyboard and mouse but I'll always head towards my Xbox for things like sports games, fighting games, platformers and exclusives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom