PC gaming: Pros and cons

[Jayson]

I think certain games just play better with a keyboard and mouse, and are more suited to playing with the screen < 3 feet away. RTS and Simulation games for example. Having played both PC Starcraft and Starcraft 64, what would you choose? Or one of the Sim City games?

I like to play FPS games on the PC but I also play them on my consoles from time to time. I like to rent newer games from Gamefly and will sometimes choose to play a particular game on a console over the PC for that reason alone. If it's a serious multiplayer game, then I always choose the PC. If it's more of a story based shooter, then I would be more inclined to play it on the couch on my PS3.

As I get older and have less time to dedicate to tinkering, I find myself putting off that PC upgrade longer and longer. Thats where the consoles always win out, ease of use.

[ZeroAX]

really I don't understand why people hate the pc so much?

is it so freaking bad, to have to lower the game's graphic settings so it runs on an old machine?

besides even lower specs look much better than anything on a console. at least until the previous generation.


this generation every company uses the freaking unreal 3 engine, so all pc games end up looking like 360 games,
without the stability cause the developers treat the pc gaming crowd like it's bitch.

just look at the gta4 pc version fiasco.


and to the guy who said about the ps1 playing the same games that came 11 years later, yeah you are right about that
BUT the gamecube couldn't play any nes snes n64 games like it should have. but pc gaming can play almost every old game, with some minor fixes

[elvis]

and to the guy who said about the ps1 playing the same games that came 11 years later, yeah you are right about that
BUT the gamecube couldn't play any nes snes n64 games like it should have. but pc gaming can play almost every old game, with some minor fixes

Yes and no.

You can't go back and play a lot of the 3dfx-only games fully hardware accelerated on modern hardware. But anything Direct3D/OpenGL will probably run without too many dramas (although I've struggled getting old DX3 titles to work - Hyperblade is one that comes to mind, as it constantly crashes on new systems). Really old games exhibit their own unique problems (particularly with timing, speed, and access to audio layers), but that's generally fixed with emulation layers like DOSBox and others.

It's not perfect. But it's better than most consoles, except probably the Wii, which is doing a pretty good job between GCN compatibility and Virtual Console.

really I don't understand why people hate the pc so much?

Whose hating anything? It's all about pros and cons, and all platforms have plenty of both.

Pros: PCs kick arse at FPS and RTS gaming (by volume of quality titles, and the fact that you can used a keyboard/mouse combo). I think they excel at their graphics and eye candy, and don't age as badly as consoles due to their ability to constantly refresh hardware. Plus you can pick your own hardware to suit your needs (including external devices - no multi-monitor on a console, for example). They've had better network play and network delivery systems (Steam, etc) for much longer. Games are frequently cheaper due to no platform licensing issues, and there's no region locking (something that shits me to tears on XBox 360). And as mentioned, you've got a better chance of playing your last-gen games on next-gen hardware (not counting emulation, which I think is a different theme all together).

Cons: PCs are expensive to maintain over time, particularly if you're unlucky enough to have chosen a platform with no upgrade path. If you don't like FPS, RTS or driving sims, you're not up for a massive array of other genres. It's getting better than it was a few years back mind you (Capcom seem to be releasing most of their stuff on PC these days, for example). But it's still not a case of being able to get all console games on PC (or vice versa, if you wish to argue the point in reverse).

I own a PC, and use it to play lots (and lots and lots) of emulated console and arcade games. But I don't play PC games, simply because I can't be arsed forking out the cash for gaming-quality hardware, and don't enjoy FPS or RTS games any more (I reached saturation point a few years back). There's no hate. Don't misconstrue lack of interest in something with hate. There's a world of grey between the black and white of hate and fanboy.

[Erik_Twice]

Elvis, please give us facts when talking about price instead of talking about

The same argument can be made today. Here's a thought experiment (because I don't have a time machine handy): Buy a PS3, and buy a PC for an identical dollar amount.

My computer is 100 euro cheaper than a PS3 and this not taking into account extra controllers (40 frigging dollars each) and that each game is 20 euros cheaper which adds pretty fast.

At the end of that 4 period, you can still go buy a brand new PS3 game and know it will run at full frame rate and quality

Full quality as of now not as full quality as of the end of that period. Also that quality is lower on the PS3 than on the PC because it's not as powerful.

Go buy a new PC game, and you'll no doubt have to pay dollars to upgrade the hardware/OS just to get the thing to run at a decent frame rate.

Or I go to the options menu and lower the options a bit.

And if the hardware you buy isn't compatible with old motherboards (anyone feel the sting of the AGP->PCIe changeover? Or as before, the countless AMD socket changes?), then spend even more dollars (upgrade the mobo, and chances are you're up for new CPU/RAM/video as well, which is the lion's share of dollar cost towards a whole new rig).

Do you feel the sting of the PS1 -> PS2 changeover? I see no difference in that at all. Also there has only been two changes in graphics cards since the 486 era so...

In fact I proved that even buying a NEW computer it's still cheaper. Dude, no offense but you are getting robbed when buying your PC

Yes, prices are lower these days (you could probably get away with $200-$400 annually), but that still shits me that I'm spending the money on hardware that could go towards a dozen or more games.

What the hell? Is your computer made from gold?

Please, instead of saying "expensive" over and over again point where I'm wrong. I use Euro but you can change those numbers to dollars because we are getting ripped off in the exchange, it's the same numbers but different currency.

[elvis]

Do you feel the sting of the PS1 -> PS2 changeover? I see no difference in that at all. Also there has only been two changes in graphics cards since the 486 era so...

There have been more than two changes. Remember that AGP1X cards where voltage incompatible with AGP4X slots.

And then there are CPU socket changes as well, which have an even worse track record. How many different sockets are we up to since the 486? Speaking for myself, the majority of my system upgrades were forced due to socket changes.

Please, instead of saying "expensive" over and over again point where I'm wrong. I use Euro but you can change those numbers to dollars because we are getting ripped off in the exchange, it's the same numbers but different currency.

Shelf price for a PS3 here in Australia today is around AU$650 (that's pack price - you generally get a couple of games and a controller, or the other way around).

Same dollars will buy me a decent dual core CPU and ATI 4650 level card.

That's fine today. No dramas. Fast forward 4 years, and what do you have? Well, there'll be a new CPU socket, which means a new mobo (and everything else). Or maybe just upgrade the graphics card? They'll probably be on PCIe 3.0 spec by then (or something different). So again you're looking at new mobo/CPU/RAM.

Either way, in 4 years you'll probably be buying a whole new system (or at least the majority dollar cost of one). And, like most gamers, you'll probably say "I won't buy low end, I'll just buy mid-range all over again" and spend another AU$650.

Rinse and repeat. Like I said, I did the same thing for over 15 years of PC gaming (on systems I paid for myself - no counting earlier family PCs of my youth). And then I objectively looked at what I spent on hardware compared to what I spent on games (I keep invoices, so I had the actual data). For every AU$200+ on a minor upgrade, or AU$650+ on a full system that I was buying every few years, that was a fist full of games I didn't buy.

And as before, today I have other expenses in my life. Children and mortgage mean that my gaming budget is much less than it once was (which means much less than many people on these forums, given the average age). That means something had to be sacrificed, and PC gaming was it. I see the same pattern amongst my workmates too. Those still young and single are avid PC gamers. The older guys who are starting families are all giving up PC gaming for cost and time reasons.

My Socket A Athlon 2600+ (since superseded by sockets 754, 939, AM2 and AM3) GeForce 4 Ti, 512MB RAM system now runs Linux. I can't be arsed spending the cash to replace it (as there's no upgrade path, and hasn't been for a few years now). I'm tired of chasing the latest hardware specs. Maybe I'll take it up again when the kids leave home in 20 years.

[Erik_Twice]

We will have to agree to disagree then because I don't pay so much when buying a new PC.

And remind that I think buying a new PC every every "generation" is cheaper than buying a console every generation so wheter you can upgrade or not is a moot point.

[ZeroAX]

I just find it sad that everyone is "accusing" pc gaming of being expensive. well yeah it kind of is but

1) you pc ain't only for games

2) gaming is a freaking expensive hobby. what did you expect?

3) there are thousands of free to play games. just look at the various retro remakes of games we here at racketboy love. (of course I'm not talking about emulators)



I don't understand why console fanboys (not players) call pc gamers elitist idiots. on the contrary. we always were jealous of the console platformers, fighting games and sports games (that play better with a gamepad), and 3rt person action games, that don't use shooting mechanics a lot (mouse is better for shouting, and auto aim just sucks imo).

But when microsoft made the xbox we saw our favourite games being raped so they can be fed to the freaking halo crowd. just look at deus ex invisible war. JUST LOOK AT DEUS EX INVISIBLE WAR. what the HECK is that thing? It's an abomination of a masterpiece.

That's why pc gamers don't like consoles these days. If you can port the pc game to the console, then go ahead do it. I'd love to have more people to talk with about my favorite video game. If you are going to port a console game to the pc I'm really happy, just make sure it controls well with keyboard and mouse (like gta san andreas, where the pc version was sooooooooo superior to the ps2 version.)

BUT don't dump down our favorite franchises (fallout, deus ex, thief) because you are afraid the halo crowd won't buy it. believe me console gamers can play sophisticated games. if you can't make the controls work, don't butcher the pc version so it'll fit in a console interface.

and when you are porting a console game to the pc, freaking beta test the thing. really games that dont' have great graphics like saint's row 2 and gta 4 make even the good modern pcs bow humbly to their resource hunger. when we have better looking games, run smoother on the same hardware, it doesn't make sense.



oh and 1 last thing. DON'T FREAKING DEMAND WE HAVE THE 360 GAMEPAD. seriously every single part pc port, demands that you have the freaking microsoft game pad (the 360 gamepad for windows). in the 2008 olympics game by sega, the manual didn't even say what the button mapping on the keyboard was. you had to try each button, on every single sport 1 by 1 to find out what does what.



btw to all halo fans out there sorry for bashing on the game, but the decline in quality of pc ports started with the xbox and xbox started because of halo

[fast]

I too have grown soured with modern pc gaming, however my $450 box from last year still runs most titles at high settings. And seeing that I play at 800x600 and low settings I am set for some time. It is true that PC gaming can cost more in the long run, but if you are smart about it that cost is minimal. I have never understood why people "have" to have the best graphical settings, but that must be from my UT & Quake background (as you can tell, I will sacrifice everything so the game runs better/faster).

My first PC I bought personally was a P4 box in 01. 2ghz, 256 megs of ddr, 40 gig harddrive, intergrated gpu, I added another 512 of ddr and a PCI geforce 5200 - no AGP (it was more for general purpose than strictly gaming). That box ran, pretty much nonstop, until mid last year. Thanks to the magic of 3d Analyzer, it got me through most major releases - stopped before Bioshock. I even beat a large chunk of Oblivion on it thanks to Oldblivion.
http://www.oldblivion.com/?page=screenshots
But when the UT3 demo would not load and the PSU finally died on it, well I opted for a new box. These are the sacrifices that I made to play the games well past the hardwares prime, and these are not sacrifices that most people will make.

But I am a tinker, so recently I decided to buy a the MSI Nettop 100 barebones - a dual core atom processor and gma 950, with 2 gigs of ddr2 and an 80 gig sataII harddrive. I paid $212 shipped. On this little box I ran Oldbivion, Neverwinter Nights Diamond, Chaos League, Titans Quest, Battlefield 2142 (solid 10 FPS), TFC with bots, and TF2 (shaky 10fps). It has far exceded my expectations. And I know many will cry foul that 10 FPS is not playable. Well I use to play UT99 at 10 fps in software rendering...But the fact of the matter is that it played the titles. Being enthused with these results, I fired up a pc I built out of trash pcs - 1.7ghz p4, 1.5 gigs of ram, and a fx5900 - it ran them slightly better - TF2 and 2142 were about 15 fps. With tweaks I am sure I could get them better. But tweaking is not something everyone finds fun, nor do they have the time to do it.

For the record, the nettop draws 38 watts at full power, plays 1080i video incredibly (though it only has VGA out), and I bought it in the hopes that in the future I would own 4-8 of them for low power lan gaming like the kind my friends and I did in college. You know: HL and mods, Total Annihilation, Tribes 2, Warlords Battlecry, Starcraft, UT99, Delta Force 2, Magic Carpet, System Shock 2, etc. And it runs all of them amazingly at the highest settings - sans Tribes 2 since that runs crazily on everything.



---
In my every once and awhile search for doujin/indy games I will have to say you are very incorrect on the lack of fighters on the PC. Sure they may not all be excellent quality, but every third game I ran into was a fighter. Some: Melty Blood, Queen of Hearts, and Big Bang Beat, are fairly well known. But others like Crimson Alive Extreme, Crucis Fatal Fake, and Soul Saber are still fairly good games and either cheap or free. Ofcourse the classic big names are not very present but Capcom keeps showing love. Come on SF4 PC...