PC vs Consoles Official Thread

[Craigus]

I can't understand why everyone is going on about skill. That has nothing to do with it.

If you had an FPS game online with two great console players and two great PC players, the PC players would crush the console players 90% of the time. This is why consoles have aim assist on the games, because it is so hard to target people with sticks, yes you get better at it the more you play, I can snap onto targets quicker than most people can in COD, which gives me an advantage, but that is only because I spend too long playing it. The same thing would apply to a PC player.

Go and play Black Ops, turn off the aim assist and see how well you do.

 

[Munson]

That video above is way too fast for me. Unrealistic.

Where is this 'point mouse at enemy' idea coming from anyway? It does not feel like that at all. You're not moving a pointer across a static screen.

 

[Scutch]

That video above is way too fast for me. Unrealistic.

Where is this 'point mouse at enemy' idea coming from anyway? It does not feel like that at all. You're not moving a pointer across a static screen.

This is what I'm trying to understand, hence my question.

I'm kinda getting it now with the mouse and how it works. Will try a few of the videos, but I agree that some of them look far too fast and unrealistic.

 

[Munson]

This is what I'm trying to understand, hence my question.

I'm kinda getting it now with the mouse and how it works. Will try a few of the videos, but I agree that some of them look far too fast and unrealistic.

Yeah. Some folk have this preconception about K&M. They associate it with how they use a mouse in Windows. Like selecting targets on a backdrop. It simply isn't like that at all.

 

[Scutch]

Yeah. Some folk have this preconception about K&M. They associate it with how they use a mouse in Windows. Like selecting targets on a backdrop. It simply isn't like that at all.

Exactly what I was thinking. Cheers.

 

[Wilkeh]

That video above is way too fast for me. Unrealistic.

Where is this 'point mouse at enemy' idea coming from anyway? It does not feel like that at all. You're not moving a pointer across a static screen.

That's only because it's Counter Strike which is a relatively fast paced game anyway (unless you're playing a proper match which is usually much slower). If I was playing COD on the PC it wouldn't be as fast as that, still quick mind. It's not exactly "point mouse" and shoot, you have to get a feel for the game and the sensitivity. Knowing how much and how fast to move your mouse from one enemy to another based on their distance apart.

I agreed earlier that it was "point mouse" and shoot but I think I mis-understood exactly what Scutch meant because it's not quite like that. It's kinda hard to explain unless he tries it for himself. Anyway, PC's for FPS's!

 

[Silent_Scone]

RPG for PC also tbh

 

[Munson]

Ultimately, the majority of console monkeys will probably never try K&M because they can't afford a power PC.

What they might like to remember though, is that PC is the home of shooters. All the games now that they think are console games, were born on a PC and designed to be played with K&M. Pads are a compromise too far, which is why the games now have sticky aim to compensate. That's not to say K&M is perfect, because it isn't. Neither control method is ever going to fully replicate the experience of running around with a gun, but K&M is definitely the most seamless option of the two (when you're used to it).

I also still fail to see how anyone finds immersion when the screen doesn't fill their field of view, but the console boys like to gloss over this, and bang on about big plasma tellies and surround sound. Great. Now try surround sound with a massive high res monitor in your face, peering into the detail and moving around without ever being conscious that you're trying to use a control device in order to aim.

I've played, and still do play, in both ways, and PC is the clear winner for me.

I'm talking solely about shooters BTW.

 

[kev182cup]

Exactly. Hence why PC > Console for FPS's. Do you now agree?

No. It's exactly the reason I prefer consoles. I think pc gamers look for different things in games. Pointing a mouse and clicking it does absolutely nothing for me. There's something more realistic about moving with analog sticks. Aslong as there's no multi platform games we'll always have a choice to play whichever we each like.

 

[Wilkeh]

Ultimately, the majority of console monkeys will probably never try K&M because they can't afford a power PC.

What they might like to remember though, is that PC is the home of shooters. All the games now that they think are console games, were born on a PC and designed to be played with K&M. Pads are a compromise too far, which is why the games now have sticky aim to compensate. That's not to say K&M is perfect, because it isn't. Neither control method is ever going to fully replicate the experience of running around with a gun, but K&M is definitely the most seamless option of the two (when you're used to it).

I also still fail to see how anyone finds immersion when the screen doesn't fill their field of view, but the console boys like to gloss over this, and bang on about big plasma tellies and surround sound. Great. Now try surround sound with a massive high res monitor in your face, peering into the detail and moving around without ever being conscious that you're trying to use a control device in order to aim.

I've played, and still do play, in both ways, and PC is the clear winner for me.

I'm talking solely about shooters BTW.

Excellent write up Roy. I completely agree with the "immersion" aspect. Peering into a high res monitor playing Half Life 2 and you almost feel like you're really there

 

[Munson]

Pointing a mouse and clicking it does absolutely nothing for me.

This isn't how PC shooters play though. Have you tried it or is this just a preconception? Serious question. I don't think you've used K&M in a shooter, and I base that purely on your comments. If you have not tried it, then you're not really in a position to say you prefer the console method.

 

[Munson]

Can't beat a spot of Doug, and what better time to repost it?

 

[Rhino172]

I can't understand why everyone is going on about skill. That has nothing to do with it.

If you had an FPS game online with two great console players and two great PC players, the PC players would crush the console players 90% of the time. This is why consoles have aim assist on the games, because it is so hard to target people with sticks, yes you get better at it the more you play, I can snap onto targets quicker than most people can in COD, which gives me an advantage, but that is only because I spend too long playing it. The same thing would apply to a PC player.

Go and play Black Ops, turn off the aim assist and see how well you do.

Slight contradiction there....spending too long playing means getting better at something. Getting better at something equates to improving your skills in said area.

RPG for PC also tbh

Depends on the RPG tbh. Final Fantasy style games on a pad but a FPS RPG (Fallout etc) would probably be better on K&M.

TBH I can't believe people are still going on about K&M vs pad for FPS. It's clearly obvious that K&M is better, simply because it's easier and more intuitive.

I started out in the world of PC gaming years ago but couldn't be arsed with the upgrades required to keep ontop with the new games so I went with the convienince of consoles.

This post is asking whats the better ALL ROUNDER for games and games only.

For me it's console thats the winner. It's more accessable, cheaper (within reason), requires less space in the home, requires much less geek knowledge regards graphics cards/sound cards etc, better for multiplayer when everyone is in the same room (four people crowded round a single keyboard and mouse all using it at the same time, no ta!), I'm sure theres more reasons but it's still too early in the morning for me...

 

[kev182cup]

I wouldn't know if I've used K&M as I never heard the term till you said it in this thread. I've tried newish games on pc before briefly so you could say I can't have a total 100% view on both but I know which I prefer. Pressing a button like a trigger and using analog sticks with rumble pack feels alot better than pressing buttons on a keyboard and moving a mouse (which you are).

 

[Munson]

So a single aspect, and the most often talked about one, can't be discussed? Not sure if serial.

Anyway, yeah. For most people consoles are the better all-round machine. That stands to reason. However, PC rinses console for shooters in pretty much every imaginable regard, except perhaps analogue walking, as previously mentioned.

I wouldn't know if I've used K&M as I never heard the term till you said it in this thread. I've tried newish games on pc before briefly so you could say I can't have a total 100% view on both but I know which I prefer. Pressing a button like a trigger and using analog sticks with rumble pack feels alot better than pressing buttons on a keyboard and moving a mouse (which you are).

You're wrong, but fair enough.

 

[kev182cup]

Haha that video is quality.

 

[Rhino172]

So a single aspect, and the most often talked about one, can't be discussed? Not sure if serial.

Anyway, yeah. For most people consoles are the better all-round machine. That stands to reason. However, PC rinses console for shooters in pretty much every imaginable regard, except perhaps analogue walking, as previously mentioned.



You're wrong, but fair enough.

It can be discussed sure as it's a relavent point to the discussion but 7 pages of...

K&M is better.....no it's not pad is better.....no it's not K&M is better, isn't really what I'd call a debate over whether a PC is better than a console for gaming or vise-versa

 

[kev182cup]

So a single aspect, and the most often talked about one, can't be discussed? Not sure if serial.

Anyway, yeah. For most people consoles are the better all-round machine. That stands to reason. However, PC rinses console for shooters in pretty much every imaginable regard, except perhaps analogue walking, as previously mentioned.



You're wrong, but fair enough.

i think there's a few million of us that are also wrong in your view Roy. Lol I think that you like pc like I like consoles. Simples

 

[Munson]

It can be discussed sure as it's a relavent point to the discussion but 7 pages of...

K&M is better.....no it's not pad is better.....no it's not K&M is better, isn't really what I'd call a debate over whether a PC is better than a console for gaming or vise-versa

It's still being discussed because some factually incorrect preconceptions regarding K&M are being hinted at. Case in point, Scutch's feeling that it might be like clicking targets on a backdrop. Hence the continued discussion. What are you, the discussion Police? Should have applied for a moderator role

I do get your point though. It's getting a bit dull now. K&M > dildos. Decided. Discussion ended.

So, onto the graphics...

 

[Spiezels]

It's still being discussed because some factually incorrect preconceptions regarding K&M are being hinted at. Case in point, Scutch's feeling that it might be like clicking targets on a backdrop. Hence the continued discussion. What are you, the discussion Police? Should have applied for a moderator role

I do get your point though. It's getting a bit dull now. K&M > dildos. Decided. Discussion ended.

So, onto the graphics...

I lol'd

Controller > K&M/

 

[Rhino172]

ha maybe I should

Onto graphics then, Before we start I think we should lay some ground rules for this one. Assuming Joe Bloggs already owns a display unit (monitor, LCD, Plasma whatever) but does not own either a PC or a console. Joe has a maximum budget of £300.

Which will provide the better graphics for the money?

 

[Scutch]

With £300, the console wins, hands down IMO.

The decent graphics cards cost more than that on their own, and no one can really say the consoles have poor graphics, because that just isn't true.

 

[Spiezels]

ha maybe I should

Onto graphics then, Before we start I think we should lay some ground rules for this one. Assuming Joe Bloggs already owns a display unit (monitor, LCD, Plasma whatever) but does not own either a PC or a console. Joe has a maximum budget of £300.

Which will provide the better graphics for the money?

You can't really apply it to money as the console would always win, shirley? you can pick up a good TV and Xbox for a few hundred squid nowadays.

If you allow for teh max then obv those gaming rigs would destroy a console but you're paying bloody thousands... unless you know how to build one yourself which not many do i'd imagine.

 

[Rhino172]

I know, but I get the feeling Roy specifically wanted to move to graphics as he knew PC would win again so I chucked in the £300 limit

 

[Spiezels]

Haha we have to do what we can!

 

[Malachi]

Not read the whole 8 pages, so forgive me if I'm repeating someone else.

I own both, and obviously both have their own merits. For FPS gaming PC wins, for me, by far... However, when it comes to racing, sports games, beat 'em ups you have to play it on console, because a mouse/keyboard just doesn't cut it.

Also, PC is obviously a one player thing, so when you have friends over it doesn't really work out :rasp: Unless you're playing Worms!

I've always been a PC gamer, but I bought a PS3 last year and I must say I was very impressed. Plus not only does it play games, it obviously plays blu rays, streams films from my DLNA server, and has an internet browser. I was considering buying a mini desktop PC to attach to the TV beforehand, but now there is no point.

 

[Rhino172]

lol, you should have read the 8 pages. You've repeated approx 95% of all posts in the whole thread

 

[Munson]

ha maybe I should

Onto graphics then, Before we start I think we should lay some ground rules for this one. Assuming Joe Bloggs already owns a display unit (monitor, LCD, Plasma whatever) but does not own either a PC or a console. Joe has a maximum budget of £300.

Which will provide the better graphics for the money?

Obviously the console, by a factor of a thousand. A £300 PC has no hope of playing anything more demanding than Peggle. Better things cost more. Not exactly news TBH.

 

[Malachi]

lol, you should have read the 8 pages. You've repeated approx 95% of all posts in the whole thread

Well I'm glad we're all agreed

 

[Scutch]

Yeah it's pretty much a keyboard and mouse vs control pad debate, which TBH is what I was creating the thread for. The title kinda blows that up a little. However, if we can discuss other features then that's great - such as graphics, sound, blue screen of death etc.

 

[Scutch]

Obviously the console, by a factor of a thousand. A £300 PC has no hope of playing anything more demanding than Peggle. Better things cost more. Not exactly news TBH.

Peggle is awseome.

 

[Rhino172]

but Peggle is pretty good tbh. I wonder what would be the best control method for it though, K&M or Pad?

 

[Malachi]

Peggle is awseome.

Hell to the yeah.

 

[Munson]

but Peggle is pretty good tbh. I wonder what would be the best control method for it though, K&M or Pad?

I thought you'd decided we couldn't talk about K&M anymore?

 

[Malachi]

Shoot me down (no pun intended) if I'm wrong, but the only FPSs that ever felt right were on N64. Goldeneye, anyone?

 

[Scutch]

Shoot me down (no pun intended) if I'm wrong, but the only FPSs that ever felt right were on N64. Goldeneye, anyone?

With the N64 pad. Analogue mushroom joystick, no less.

 

[Rhino172]

for FPS games yeah...still good to go on other game types lol

why is everyone listening to what I say anyway? lol it's Scuthio's thread, I was simply stating it's getting a bit boring discussing the same thing for 7 pages with no real resolve. (horses for courses etc)

 

[Malachi]

FPSs are the only true gaming genre

JK.

But seriously, I think I fell out of love with consoles after the N64. I loved the fact it didn't take forever to load games, and four player split screen on Goldeneye, Mario Kart etc. was amazing. Maybe I'm looking back with rose tinted spectacles, but console gaming was a lot more "fun" back in the day. I think people take it too seriously now, myself included.

 

[Silent_Scone]

Golden Eye was good on N64, it was designed primarily for that particular awesome controller. Plus Rare know what they are doing, or at least did before Microsoft got their dirty mitts on them

 

[Munson]

What I want to know is, when are the two main console makers going to announce their 'next gen' machines? Developers may actually start pushing the graphics engines forward when there's hardware in consoles to use them. Crysis was crazy. Really pushing the boundaries at the time, but it's gone stale since then. No other games are pushing that hard, not even the SEQUEL to the game that redefined what "this game will cripple your PC" actually meant. Now we're just plodding along with very little improvement. The consoles are maxed out, and the power PC is largely driving with one hand on the wheel even with brand spanking new releases.

Will Sony & MS ever sir it up and release new hardware, or are they happy to sit on what they've got so long as the cash keeps rolling in from easily pleased console monkeys who don't even know what antialiasing is?