The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I really hate me PC!!! there I have said it
Year shure the games are brill but they cost the same as the consol games do and you have to use the horrible mouse and keyboard.
Imagin this right you see a game that is brand new that cost £35 right. You go out and buy it from mail order shop because you know it will come the day of releas, right, all nice and bandy so far. OK. Then you go to your computer and put into the CD drive and install it like you do right and open the file the runs the game you get past the meuse fine and then start the game, so far so good the you start playing and really get into the game and "boof!!!!!!!!" your and back to the desktop and fast if not faster then it took to load the game. You know why because I have orded mail order and did not bother looking at the minimum system requiremnts.
However I thought that I did not need to because my PC is only about 1 and half years old. seams that I needed to upgread my graphics card that cost me £130 and geuse what a few mounth latter I needed to upgread again and few mounth latter again and again and agian..............
you get the picture right so why bother at all when you can buy a Playstation and only have to pay the price of the game and not the constant upgread cost? I have now hit my computer with a very larg and heavey hammer because I got so frustrated that I just could not cope any more.
SO if thinking about getting a PC do not bother wast of money considering it cost £799.99+ when you can get a PS2 for 199.99+ beleave me the games are just as good for the PS2 as for the PC.
Year shure the games are brill but they cost the same as the consol games do and you have to use the horrible mouse and keyboard.
Imagin this right you see a game that is brand new that cost £35 right. You go out and buy it from mail order shop because you know it will come the day of releas, right, all nice and bandy so far. OK. Then you go to your computer and put into the CD drive and install it like you do right and open the file the runs the game you get past the meuse fine and then start the game, so far so good the you start playing and really get into the game and "boof!!!!!!!!" your and back to the desktop and fast if not faster then it took to load the game. You know why because I have orded mail order and did not bother looking at the minimum system requiremnts.
However I thought that I did not need to because my PC is only about 1 and half years old. seams that I needed to upgread my graphics card that cost me £130 and geuse what a few mounth latter I needed to upgread again and few mounth latter again and again and agian..............
you get the picture right so why bother at all when you can buy a Playstation and only have to pay the price of the game and not the constant upgread cost? I have now hit my computer with a very larg and heavey hammer because I got so frustrated that I just could not cope any more.
SO if thinking about getting a PC do not bother wast of money considering it cost £799.99+ when you can get a PS2 for 199.99+ beleave me the games are just as good for the PS2 as for the PC.
Page:
The answer to your question is surely that a PC is not a console in rather the same way that a ferret is not a parachute.
PCs are not made simply for playing games - you'd pay about three times the cost of an XBoz, say, for a machine on which you can play games that are at least as sophisticated but also do a lot more - in fact pretty much anything. Like access the Internet, edit your home videos/web site, use office applications, compose music, create graphics, share song and video files and so on.
Comparing the relative qualities of all the games on consoles and all the games on the PC is an exhausting and utterly pointless exercise because no-one is ever going to play all the games on all the systems. I think you could make a few useful points by characterising the general differences between the two though.
By and large console games are more "arcade" orientated. You don't get games like "Dead Or Alive" or "Tekken" on the PC because PC gamers generally want a more involving, long-term, complicated gaming experience. The reverse is true: you don't get games like "Civilisation" or "Black & White" on consoles. Yes, I am sure there are a few counter-examples of obscure games that practically no-one has bought, but (I hope) you see my point.
For a case study look at racing games - my particular preference. Top PC racing games include Grand Prix 3 and Grand Prix Legends, both very technical simulations that require quite a bit of practice to get the most out of and to play well at the hardest levels. By comparison on the consoles you have Gran Turismo 3 - an equally excellent game but a markedly different one. Although you can spend forever tweaking your cars' handling the actual knowledge you require to complete the game is far less than you would expect. At any rate the vast majority of the time you can exploit the loophole of being able to enter races in a car of far superior performance to your rivals - of which there are only five anyway.
Alternatively the XBox has Project Gotham Racing with similarly gorgeous cars but racing on a cavalcade of unrealistic street circuits where your performance is ranked as much by your "Kudos" as your driving skill. I think this illustrates quite vividly the difference between PCs and consoles. PC games (and perhaps also PC Gamers) tend to take themselves much more seriously - console games are usually more about pick-up-and-play fun.
I think your point about not checking the hardware requirements is pretty redundant because these requirements are published for a reason and if you can't be bothered to read them then you have only yourself to blame - you can't really make a case for arguing that PCs are pointless based on that.
I would say, however, that the costs required to play modern PC games are often overestimated. Just because a GeForce4 is the latest graphics card does not mean that you cannot play the latest game - Medal Of Honour: Allied Assault, say - without one. In fact I've played the latter game quite happily on a system based on a P2-450 processor and NVidia Riva TNT2 graphics card with 256Mb RAM. You could probably build a system based around this for around £400. And then you could use it to check your e-mail, type letters...
I'm quite envious of the person who posted stating that he gave his PC far more attention than his PS2 - to be able to have both would be quite a nice compromise. Ultimately what machine is best for you depends on what type of games you like. If you want to play games quickly, briefly, with the minimum effort, get a PS2/XBox/GameBrick. If you prefer more technical games and do stuff other than play games, get a PC.
If you're rich, get both.
PCs are not made simply for playing games - you'd pay about three times the cost of an XBoz, say, for a machine on which you can play games that are at least as sophisticated but also do a lot more - in fact pretty much anything. Like access the Internet, edit your home videos/web site, use office applications, compose music, create graphics, share song and video files and so on.
Comparing the relative qualities of all the games on consoles and all the games on the PC is an exhausting and utterly pointless exercise because no-one is ever going to play all the games on all the systems. I think you could make a few useful points by characterising the general differences between the two though.
By and large console games are more "arcade" orientated. You don't get games like "Dead Or Alive" or "Tekken" on the PC because PC gamers generally want a more involving, long-term, complicated gaming experience. The reverse is true: you don't get games like "Civilisation" or "Black & White" on consoles. Yes, I am sure there are a few counter-examples of obscure games that practically no-one has bought, but (I hope) you see my point.
For a case study look at racing games - my particular preference. Top PC racing games include Grand Prix 3 and Grand Prix Legends, both very technical simulations that require quite a bit of practice to get the most out of and to play well at the hardest levels. By comparison on the consoles you have Gran Turismo 3 - an equally excellent game but a markedly different one. Although you can spend forever tweaking your cars' handling the actual knowledge you require to complete the game is far less than you would expect. At any rate the vast majority of the time you can exploit the loophole of being able to enter races in a car of far superior performance to your rivals - of which there are only five anyway.
Alternatively the XBox has Project Gotham Racing with similarly gorgeous cars but racing on a cavalcade of unrealistic street circuits where your performance is ranked as much by your "Kudos" as your driving skill. I think this illustrates quite vividly the difference between PCs and consoles. PC games (and perhaps also PC Gamers) tend to take themselves much more seriously - console games are usually more about pick-up-and-play fun.
I think your point about not checking the hardware requirements is pretty redundant because these requirements are published for a reason and if you can't be bothered to read them then you have only yourself to blame - you can't really make a case for arguing that PCs are pointless based on that.
I would say, however, that the costs required to play modern PC games are often overestimated. Just because a GeForce4 is the latest graphics card does not mean that you cannot play the latest game - Medal Of Honour: Allied Assault, say - without one. In fact I've played the latter game quite happily on a system based on a P2-450 processor and NVidia Riva TNT2 graphics card with 256Mb RAM. You could probably build a system based around this for around £400. And then you could use it to check your e-mail, type letters...
I'm quite envious of the person who posted stating that he gave his PC far more attention than his PS2 - to be able to have both would be quite a nice compromise. Ultimately what machine is best for you depends on what type of games you like. If you want to play games quickly, briefly, with the minimum effort, get a PS2/XBox/GameBrick. If you prefer more technical games and do stuff other than play games, get a PC.
If you're rich, get both.
Granted you do have to upgrade every so often to get the best out of the newest PC games, but I myself don't find this a problem. If anything the ability to upgrade the PC makes it the best gaming platform out there.
Anyway most of us have both a console and a PC for gaming, and I can tell you now my PC gets more attension than my PS2, just for the shear quality of the games available.
Anyway most of us have both a console and a PC for gaming, and I can tell you now my PC gets more attension than my PS2, just for the shear quality of the games available.
Of course, to get the best of the gaming world, you have to buy all the NG platforms. Except for the Xbox, probably.
I swear sid didn't read that attractive yellowy coloured post by me down their ;)
Fine then, go out and buy an X-Box and stop bothering us.
The PC may be the best thing for certain games but lets face it the onley thing that the PC was invented for was letter writting, looking at porn and playing stratergy games.
for two of these you do not require a strong PC however not that stratergy games are not all going 3D you need a wonder computer to play them on line. because lets face it thats the only thing the PC has got going for it.
for two of these you do not require a strong PC however not that stratergy games are not all going 3D you need a wonder computer to play them on line. because lets face it thats the only thing the PC has got going for it.
The PC is a real Hardcore gamers platform, most of these gamers don't care how much they spend on upgrades for their machines, because in the end they will have one of the most powerful gaming platforms around. I wouldn't consider myself one of these hardcore game players, but I have yet to regret any purchase on any upgrade I have bought.
Go out and buy a console if you can't see the point of PC's and dream about all the great games you won't be able to play.
Go out and buy a console if you can't see the point of PC's and dream about all the great games you won't be able to play.
I understand that the PC can be better at times however it does get very distressing when you need to upgread it all the time. yes you can get a PC for £400 but does it really work for the games that you what to play?
with a console what you see is pritty much what you get. and do not say you can not play online becasue you can now with the X-box. the best thing about it is that when you buy a game you know that is going to work.
and yes you can get broud band with a consal as well.
with a console what you see is pritty much what you get. and do not say you can not play online becasue you can now with the X-box. the best thing about it is that when you buy a game you know that is going to work.
and yes you can get broud band with a consal as well.
Hey i'm getting a PC for £552 top range and broadband ..... X box is 400 quid plys games and all those crap!
Page: