Why are there more console posts?
- Thread starter MumboJumbo
- Start date
8igdave said:
Well i for one atm am preferring consoles, but tbh like i said, that is because the console exclusive games are more appealing to me than anything my PC can't handle.
As for KB/M it all is a matter of preference and what type of game you are playing. Playing Tomb Raider legend, just isn't going to cut it with a pad. Playing a driving game isn't going to cut it with a pad, i think most will agree that Shooters and RTS' are better on KB?M but to what extent is just a matter of opinion. But a kb/m combo just isn't going to cut it when i am sitting on the couch playing on my TV
Sure consoles need upgraded, but not really to the extent of PCs. I mean i got my PS2 in 2000 and got my PS3 at the very end of 2006, so there is a big gap between upgrades, and the cost is usually in the £300 mark.
As for mods, well UT3 on the PS3 is going to have mods, full access to all the PC mods
- Joined
- 2 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 8,204
@JUMPURS
I still think modability will always be best on pcs where you can make them your self etc. PS3 will only be able to port mods to ps3 and therefore will not probly have such a huge range and may have catchs to it. Mmmm greedy profits coming in?
Also, FPS's i always find better on pcs with surround sound for pin point accuracy where they are and a mouse for better aim of course. The added bonus of xfire and things like that. I know they are on PS3. But how many of your friends are gona be on xifre compared to ps3 and can you talk to them all at the same time ? ?
I cant imagin playing medievil 2 total war on a consol. I beleive internet possiblities are better on pc as well? bf2 does 62 players. And ive seen others at 100+ i beleive?? how many can a console do?
I still think modability will always be best on pcs where you can make them your self etc. PS3 will only be able to port mods to ps3 and therefore will not probly have such a huge range and may have catchs to it. Mmmm greedy profits coming in?
Also, FPS's i always find better on pcs with surround sound for pin point accuracy where they are and a mouse for better aim of course. The added bonus of xfire and things like that. I know they are on PS3. But how many of your friends are gona be on xifre compared to ps3 and can you talk to them all at the same time ? ?
I cant imagin playing medievil 2 total war on a consol. I beleive internet possiblities are better on pc as well? bf2 does 62 players. And ive seen others at 100+ i beleive?? how many can a console do?
Tbh for the rrp of a ps3 you can actually get a good pc. 
For £425 I've seen.
Antec NSK4400 380W Case & PSU
******* 2GB (2x1GB) DDR2 667MHz
Intel Core 2 Duo E4500 2.20Ghz
POV 8800GTS 320MB
Western Digital 160GB HDD
20x NEC DVD-RW
And we all know how well the c2d's clock.
For £425 I've seen.
Antec NSK4400 380W Case & PSU
******* 2GB (2x1GB) DDR2 667MHz
Intel Core 2 Duo E4500 2.20Ghz
POV 8800GTS 320MB
Western Digital 160GB HDD
20x NEC DVD-RW
And we all know how well the c2d's clock.
Last edited:
You can get a PC with a X1950 Pro for 256 quid now (You can save even more if you drop to 2GB Ram), it won't be too far off looking as good as the 360 can, heck I'd have thought Oblivion would look better on a PC with a X1950 Pro at least.JUMPURS said:
Energize said:Tbh for the rrp of a ps3 you can actually get a good pc.
For £125 I've seen.
Antec NSK4400 380W Case & PSU
******* 2GB (2x1GB) DDR2 667MHz
Intel Core 2 Duo E4500 2.20Ghz
POV 8800GTS 320MB
Western Digital 160GB HDD
20x NEC DVD-RW
And we all know how well the c2d's clock.
Last edited:
Majority of them will be better on PC though unless the port turns out really, really bad, which for quite a few of them games it won't.JUMPURS said:
I mainly like PC better because a) controls, b) graphical upgrades and c) PC online kicks console online gamings ass big time. (Loads and loads and loads....and loads of servers for games with more players in general)
i spent just over 400 quid for the mobo ram and cpu in my sig. online gaming is my main thing, mainly bf2. ive seen various games on xbox 36o/ps3 and i gotta admit they look pretty good. but the only thing that puts me of is small teams in a multiplayer game, eg graw 16 players, on pc bf2, 64 or joint ops 150. plus the pc can be upgraded bit by bit whereas the consoles when they become obsolete you have to buy a new machine
- Joined
- 2 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 8,204
You gota pay to play online on a console as well. And they suffer terribly in non deadicated servers im told? Like gears of war etc. Where as now days i beleive most intense games on pc would have dedecated servers. Which i gues you could argue someone pays for... but not me
Nah Live is pretty decent lag-wise, depends on two things, the game having good netcode and not joining someone who is trying to host more than their connection can handle.8igdave said:You gota pay to play online on a console as well. And they suffer terribly in non deadicated servers im told? Like gears of war etc. Where as now days i beleive most intense games on pc would have dedecated servers. Which i gues you could argue someone pays for... but not me
Live is great but I prefer PC online, the amount of servers is gobsmacking for PC games, plus all the mods for servers you can get on games like CS:S they improve the experience.
But would it look better than a 360 running Lost planet, GoW, DiRT, UT3?Jihad said:
8igdave said:You gota pay to play online on a console as well. And they suffer terribly in non deadicated servers im told? Like gears of war etc. Where as now days i beleive most intense games on pc would have dedecated servers. Which i gues you could argue someone pays for... but not me
Don't tar all consoles with the same brush
You need to pay to play online with the 360 and that is a bit of a lag fest
PS3 has some games with dedicated servers
If you look at the stats, the Console forum doesn't have THAT many more posts than the PCG forum - less than 2% more in fact.
The number of threads is considerably more, but essentially that just means that there is a smaller ratio of posts:threads there. Or in other words there are more topics but discussed in less depth than in here
As mentioned above, the big difference is all all Console Hardware talk takes place there too. If the hardware forums weren't seperated, PC would wipe the floor with Consoles on the forums.
The number of threads is considerably more, but essentially that just means that there is a smaller ratio of posts:threads there. Or in other words there are more topics but discussed in less depth than in here
As mentioned above, the big difference is all all Console Hardware talk takes place there too. If the hardware forums weren't seperated, PC would wipe the floor with Consoles on the forums.
* Not read any other posts so excuse me if it has been said already*
Personally i think it's because PC gamers are much more Interweb savvy & do a lot of research themselves. Most PC gamers are active on the web in other ways & make full use of Google.
Personally i think it's because PC gamers are much more Interweb savvy & do a lot of research themselves. Most PC gamers are active on the web in other ways & make full use of Google.
^On other forums I might agree, but I think most of the people posting in the Console forum at OcUK are more 'web-savvy' than Console users in general.
Or in other words, OcUK isn't a console-specific forum - I doubt many people in there joined purely to post in Consoles like you would see elsewhere. Having a quick glance at some of the names backs this up, as I recognise many of them from other subforums.
Or in other words, OcUK isn't a console-specific forum - I doubt many people in there joined purely to post in Consoles like you would see elsewhere. Having a quick glance at some of the names backs this up, as I recognise many of them from other subforums.