Why I prefer Home Computer Gaming over Console gaming?

Gimpymoo · 17 Mar 2007 at 00:30

I have been playing computer games since I was about 5 years old when my parents pai £200 for a Spectrum +2 :eek:

I loved it and enjoyed my Spectrum for many many years with the only "Upgrade" needed being an Expansion pack to enable me to use the Kempston Joystick interface.

I had MANY MANY MANY games for my Spectrum and I never got bored with the varied choice available. From Adventure games, to sports games from Coin-Op Conversions to Original Franchises. My favorite games being Chuckie Egg, PANG, New Zealand Story and Rainbow Islands which were EXCELLENT Conversions.

During this time, I had friends who had their Master Systems, NES's and Megadrives and SNES's. Now, although I enjoyed playing on these consoles, I still went home to my humble Sinclair and enjoyed it immensely.

I got a NES about 2 years after the SNES came out and enjoyed Blades Of Steel and North and South but that was about it.

At the same time, I had a few friends who were lucky enough to own Amiga 500's/600's and this appealed to me more than any of the consoles. I dont know why exactly, I just liked the style of games I guess, even though a lot of the games I liked on the 8/16 bit home computers were also on the 8/16 bit consoles.

A friend built his first PC and I bought his Amiga 500+ from him and I kept both my Amiga and Speccy side by side - Haaaaaa

I STILL had no urge to buy a console so I eventually got my First PC with Windows 95 and never looked back. A few years later I got Half Life and that was me branded a Home computer gamer for life

It may sound quiet sad, but that game will ALLWAYS be a large part of my childhood as sad as that sounds, it was one of those moments you never forget as I was playing through that game. Sure, I got the Zen worlds and gave up, but thats another story

I also discovered Total Anihilation which was another milestone in my gaming career

Current day and I still find myself in the same position, sure my friends have some very nice Consoles but for some reason, im more than happy to stick with my Home Computer for my gaming needs, sure I caved in and got a Nintendo DS and Wii, but only because they offered something my Home Computer could not.

To this day, I still dont know why I prefer gaming on the home computer than a console. I personally find playing games sat on the sofa actually less emmersive than being sat infront of the monitor and pretty much allways have done.

Sure, Home Computer gaming is expensive, niggly and far from perfect for some, but I consider myself lucky as I dont see these niggles as problems as I have enough experiance to work around them. Its kind of like the annoying sibbling who you allways argue with, yet youd feel lost without them. I guess the modification of Home Computer games is a big plus but I wouldnt say that is the reason why I love it more than consoles.

Another strange thing is that I prefer to play Sports and driving games which I know would be better on a console and probably have more choice, and I also am not a HUGE fan of First person shooters, yeah, I love the Half Life Series, although maybe I feel obliged to like HL2 and sequals due to the importance of the first one in my life but I am not tempted to buy a console and am happy to stick with the home computer which I know may sound weird considering the type of games I like and dont like should dictate me owning a console.

I thought typing this would bring me the answer of "WHY I prefer Home Computer gaming over consoles"..... All I know is that I feel more loyal than ever to my little black box.

Sorry for the long post.

To think.. it all started with a Spectrum +2

SkeeterUK · 17 Mar 2007 at 00:42

With consoles you dont really get anything like the games you can get for pc. Like 3rd person point and click adventure games, rts games, online games that dont need some xbox live farce just need instead a good connection and thats it. Plus with pc games you have access to mods for many many games. And even make your own if you learn or even get a programing suite and make a game yourself!

Consoles is fine with gfx etc and some good games but for me the games are too expensive the consoles sold are too expensive and your limited to what you can do on a console as in mainly play games or watch a dvd or music cd and thats it.

Tony Williams · 17 Mar 2007 at 01:08

Good points on a computer I'd say are; game modifications, overall neutral with games, can get decent framerates providing machines specs, mouse and keyboard on fps games, (some cases) no need to use disc to play game, applys to all gen (although XBLA is doing good), IMO better online play, some games that are ported from the PC tend to lack framerates on consoles, play mp3s too, emulation power

Goods about consoles; no game install runs out of the can and no worrying about if the machine will handle it or not, some games are only on certain consoles or are released earler on consoles (ie gow, gta, halo), play games on a TV (I know it CAN be done on a PC too), multiplayer splitscreen, universal controller - works on all the consoles games no options to configure or drivers to install, generally cheap compared to a computer,

skullman · 17 Mar 2007 at 02:25

SkeeterPSA said:
the games are too expensive the consoles sold are too expensive

I agree console games can be overpriced, but the consoles themselves while expensive you do get a lot for your money.

Personally I play both PC and console. Both have their advantages. Why choose?

Briton · 17 Mar 2007 at 13:19

I simply could not play many of the games I like on consoles and the majority others would be a poorer experience for me. We have an X-box 360 and PS2 in the house but they hold no interest for me whatsoever.

Darkwave · 17 Mar 2007 at 13:32

*Walks into thread.*

*Grabs a fire extinguisher and flameproof jacket.*

*Preapares to evacuate thread.*

theo · 17 Mar 2007 at 14:10

skullman said:
I agree console games can be overpriced, but the consoles themselves while expensive you do get a lot for your money.

Personally I play both PC and console. Both have their advantages. Why choose?

too true, just sitting here with my 360 and my pc side by side, pc isn't the best but i dont care and it stills plays everything so far

choice is a good thing, mixing and matching is better imo

philds · 17 Mar 2007 at 14:29

I totally agree with OP, I find any console game to be a poor mans version of it's PC equivalent. Even with these next gen consoles, the GPU manufacturers come out within months with a faster more capable GPU (Crysis and the new DX10 GPUs etc) With a games console you are very 'locked in' to that format and the games made for it, and the OS as well, with a PC you get Windows or Linux (whichever takes your fancy) and is the true media hub. With a console you get a very basic OS which tries it's best to emulate the PC support for media.

Inquisitor · 17 Mar 2007 at 14:39

Ulfhedjinn said:
*Walks into thread.*

*Grabs a fire extinguisher and flameproof jacket.*

*Preapares to evacuate thread.*

Well this is the PC gaming forum, so I don't think there'll be a lot of flaming :confused:

SkeeterUK · 17 Mar 2007 at 14:42

Shame theres no games thats like the good old spectrum games for pc. They were fun if simple.

Darkwave · 17 Mar 2007 at 14:51

Inquisitor said:
Well this is the PC gaming forum, so I don't think there'll be a lot of flaming

Hahaha I wish I was logged into the same OcUK forums as you.

Metalface Mark · 17 Mar 2007 at 14:59

I felt the same till the 360 came out - now i game mostly on consoles.

I still love my laptop though.

Kojak · 17 Mar 2007 at 16:11

philds said:
... I find any console game to be a poor mans version of it's PC equivalent. ...

...With a console you get a very basic OS which tries it's best to emulate the PC support for media.

If a PC game has been ported to a console it always feels compromised and the opposite is true too.

I don't think consoles do try and emulate PCs in all honesty. They are trying to become media centres (with the exception of the Wii) and I suppose this is sharing common ground with the PC but let's not forget that the PC is not primarily a games machine. PCs are first and foremost highly flexible work machines that can be upgraded/tailored to play games. Consoles are dedicated games machines and in my opinion they do a damn good job for the money. That said, there are always going to be certain types of games that feel at home on the PC and for this reason alone PC gaming will continue to exist.

Darkwave · 17 Mar 2007 at 16:41

Kojak said:
PCs are first and foremost highly flexible work machines that can be upgraded/tailored to play games.

IMO PCs are first and foremost whatever you build them to do, with no absolute.

Work, gaming, media centre or all of the above. No set standard or baseline.

Kojak · 17 Mar 2007 at 17:21

Ulfhedjinn said:
IMO PCs are first and foremost whatever you build them to do, with no absolute.

Work, gaming, media centre or all of the above. No set standard or baseline.

PCs actually have quite a poor architecture for gaming. They are getting better but they are far from being a dedicated games machine. As discussed in another thread on these forums the CPU in a PC has to be a jack of all trades. The fact that there's 'No set standard or baseline' often hinders the PC. The fact that it's as good as it is, is impressive.

SkeeterUK · 17 Mar 2007 at 17:41

Which is why its about time some company made a gaming os that loads only direct x as thats really all you should be needing to play games etc as thats what games are designed around. Should be a dual boot system, 1 for windows and 1 for gaming OS.

Kojak · 17 Mar 2007 at 17:43

SkeeterPSA said:
Which is why its about time some company made a gaming os that loads only direct x as thats really all you should be needing to play games etc as thats what games are designed around. Should be a dual boot system, 1 for windows and 1 for gaming OS.

I agree, that would be great.

drunkenmaster · 17 Mar 2007 at 17:48

Kojak said:
PCs actually have quite a poor architecture for gaming. They are getting better but they are far from being a dedicated games machine. As discussed in another thread on these forums the CPU in a PC has to be a jack of all trades. The fact that there's 'No set standard or baseline' often hinders the PC. The fact that it's as good as it is, is impressive.

they have a poor architecture for gaming? other than minor resources being used up by the OS and generally 1-2% of cpu power being used in the background for other programs, that ultimately makes no difference.

the gfx cards in consoles are the same(or close enough) to the versions we have at home. the cpu's, well some have been the same, P3 basically in the first xbox. yes they have fancy names but they aren't more powerful or better than PC cpu's. they just use different instruction sets but they basically work the same, program asks cpu to calculate if the bullet with set vector will hit anything, however it asks, or calculates, its still doing the same thing.

consoles aren't better value for money IMHO. you pay more for games, the console itself is subsidised so you get more for that actual money than you would buying computer parts. but everyone, and i mean everyone i know has a computer, every house, most kids/friends have their own computers aswell. the only thing you need to add to any box you build or buy is a decent gfx card. a 8800gts 320mb is a LOT more powerful than the xbox 360/ps3 gfx cards, so add a £175 card to a computer you already have and you have something much much more versatile, cheaper, and twice as powerful as a console, then games are cheaper.

i have had consoles, not many, not played them much and don't enjoy them much. basic sports "pick up and play" games i don't mind playing round a m8's once in a while, but they aren't games i can play a lot, console gaming has no lasting value for me and the hardware is often outdated before they are released(ps3) or within a few months like the xbox360. i wouldn't buy a 8800gtx the day before the G100 comes out, or the day after either.

i prefer multiplayer games where i don't lose half/ or 3/4's of the screen, i prefer to play in the comfort of my room in a nice chair without being interupted. the only real reason i see for a console is as a social gaming machine, and thats the only place i think they excel.

V4NT0M · 17 Mar 2007 at 17:57

SkeeterPSA said:
Which is why its about time some company made a gaming os that loads only direct x as thats really all you should be needing to play games etc as thats what games are designed around. Should be a dual boot system, 1 for windows and 1 for gaming OS.

PLS dont sue me if i implement this

drunkenmaster · 17 Mar 2007 at 18:05

SkeeterPSA said:
Which is why its about time some company made a gaming os that loads only direct x as thats really all you should be needing to play games etc as thats what games are designed around. Should be a dual boot system, 1 for windows and 1 for gaming OS.

ok, you can say that, but name something within windows that makes gaming difficult. the windows kernal is fairly small, the background processes use very little power. all the little programs you have running in the background really don't effect anything unless you have too little memory. the only thing a gaming specific OS would do would mean constantly rebooting. oh, and whoever put up the games working out the box argument for consoles being good. games install very quickly, then you can load them from hard drive with much much shorter load times than consoles. i'd take that 5 mins to install anytime to have load times which saves so much more time.