Viewing Thread:
"Consoles and PC's"

Consoles and PC’s have all ways been different. PC’s were originally used for Word Processing. Consoles were used for playing games. They still are... mostly. But the use for PC’s has changed. No longer are they solely used for Word Processing and to keep track of customer records. Now people have them in their homes. What do they us them for their? Games, the Internet, work... anything and everything really.

The differences between console and PC gaming are numerous in amount and are rather large differences. Let’s look at a few of them:

1) PC’s have more power than consoles do, so, naturally, they’re going to have better graphics. Which is true. You just need to glance at Black and White to see that that is true. Don’t get me wrong, console graphics are usually of a very high standard but because consoles lack the power that the PC’s have, it’s just not POSSIBLE to use graphics of the PC’s standard.

2) PC’s use CDs, so that allows for the games to be larger... much larger. Your average PC game is absolutely huge. Even the PS2 can’t compare to a PC in this department... yet anyway. Because PC’s have this ability, it gives the developers and creators of the games a chance to really let their imaginations run wild. With this extra space they can put more detail into their games making them more life like and enjoyable.

3) With PC’s being connected to Internet it allows for Online Gaming, which gives the player the chance to play against other people who could be anywhere in the world.

Looking at the last point two points, you’ll probably be thinking "Hang on, the Dreamcast and the Playstation 2 can do that". Well, you’re right, they can. And that’s exactly my point.

Over the years consoles have evolved into much more than just things to play games on. You can now play online, in fact, you can even surf the Net using your PS2 or your Dreamcast. That ability is now not exclusive to PC’s only. Some of them use CDs so THAT is now no longer exclusive to PC’s. Like I’ve said CDs are bigger than cartridges so the developers can do more with a game that’s going to be put on CD.

Graphics as well. True, at the moment the graphics on a PC game are better than they are on consoles but not by much they’re not. With the release of the GameCube and the X-Box within the next year, console graphics standards will be raised. They will just as good as PC graphics.

Consoles and PC’s have begun to merge together. Now longer is it just PC owners that can play people in Australia, PS2 and Dreamcast owners can as well. For not much longer is it going to be just PC owners that can have near photo-realistic graphics, soon enough GameCube and X-Box owners will be able to as well.

If this is happening now and in the very near future then what is it going to be like in the distant future? Will consoles and PC’s be totally merged by then? Will we be able to type up work and other things, surf the Internet and play very good looking, very large games on consoles then?

Who knows? From what’s happened so far I would definitely not rule out that possibility. All I can say is this, PC’s and consoles are merging and I, for one, will not be totally surprised if, sooner or later, they become the same thing.

RBS

Thats what I ment earlier.

One game works on all playstations but the same game will not work on all pcs.

Consoles are better games wise. Alot less fuss and they last longer. And are also cheaper.

*Cha-ching*

I've just had a great idea ofr a new topic... that's been done lots of times before... but who cares!!!

Dan uk wrote:
> The way I see it, PC's are good for working on but un economical for
> games.

Within a year or 2 you'll need an upgrade (which will
> probably cost as much as 2 consoles)

Consoles on the other hand
> are cheap and more reliable.

PC's are better if you have the time
> and money and effort to keep it in good shape.

Consoles last as
> long as you need.

That is a problem with PCs and their games. As the games get better, you will need to upgrade your PC, where as you don't on consoles. Good point Dan uk.

The way I see it, PC's are good for working on but un economical for games.

Within a year or 2 you'll need an upgrade (which will probably cost as much as 2 consoles)

Consoles on the other hand are cheap and more reliable.

PC's are better if you have the time and money and effort to keep it in good shape.

Consoles last as long as you need.

DeltaJava wrote:
> RastaBillySkank wrote:
> Thanks anyway.

All though I'm not
> sure whether to take the
> "I was bored" comments as
> an insult or a compliment :-P

All my words are of a complimentary
> value... a-hole...

Umm, yes obviously... :-D

RastaBillySkank wrote:
> Thanks anyway.

All though I'm not sure whether to take the
> "I was bored" comments as an insult or a compliment :-P

All my words are of a complimentary value.

Mantis wrote:
> I think thats the key to winning GAD. There is no use in writing a
> great topic when no one disscusses it.

If you get a lot of
> genuine replys about the topic you prob have a much better chance of
> winning.

I don't seem to be doing very well with my new topic on Game rentals. I am not worried about winning GAD, I just want to know what people think thats all.

Ah well, maybe I should have had a crack at this topic, but Rasta got it first. Phooey!

Thanks anyway.

All though I'm not sure whether to take the "I was bored" comments as an insult or a compliment :-P

Yeah, I was bored too.

RastaBillySkank wrote:
> Thanks for saying something on the subject of the topic you three!
> It's much appreciated!

No problem! It was a good post, that deserved to be talked about.