Viewing Thread:
"PC the best console yet!!"

!! PC the best console yet!!
because name a console that does all the games like ECT, grand theft auto 1,2,3,london , resident evil 1,2,3 what do u think??? cos i think PC the best . because i think the Xbox wont do this nor will gamecube or will it?? its done the resident evil.1 better will it do number 2 like it? (i hope u can understand this)

gerrid wrote:
> Well said.
> Recently I have been more into PC gaming than console gaming because
> a) It's cheaper
> b) It's more customisable
> c) Recently there has been a much larger quantity of quality games
> available for the PC, whereas the consoles are soreley lacking.

a- PC gaming is expensive, you need a PC, and a good one would set you back at least £1000.

b- Yes ill give you that, but then it is more prone to crashing.

c- i totally disagree. There are so many quality games on the gamecube that i have run out of money buying them. Ps2 has GTA3 and i hope GTa4 will be multi format.

PC for games instead of a console? I don't think so. This issue about graphics settings, like the 1152x870 thing. Consoles don't have to rely on this - since they have other "console only" tech inside to compensate. For example, the GameCube is 640x480, but the graphics are fine. Then there's the software. Installing upgrades to the OS so you can run the latest games and other third party software. There's a BIG XP push due soon, and anyone without XP is going to feel very left out. After a big XP push, other software developers will bring out upgrades for their products which will (in the main) require XP to run.

Well said.
Recently I have been more into PC gaming than console gaming because
a) It's cheaper
b) It's more customisable
c) Recently there has been a much larger quantity of quality games available for the PC, whereas the consoles are soreley lacking.

Belldandy wrote:
> And why does the PC version
> of GTA3 need such a relatively high spec to run well when it still,
> even on max settings, doesn't look much better than the PS2 version ?
> Developers for the PCare lazy and it shows.

It doesnt... I regularly play GTA3 on my machine... with all the settings maxed... If your interested in knowing about the PC enhancements, why not visit gta3.com, they provide a list of the updates they made to the PC version over the PS2 version.

I love PC gaming, I have a ton of great games for my computer and I do upgrade when I see fit. as for the comment earlier 'PC devlopers are lazy' well I have to say I haven't played a game where I can say that comment was true. Warcraft 3, Mafia, SOF2, NOLF ect all great games which are really well designed, far more so than similar games I've played on my two consoles.

I can see why not everyuone will like PC gaming though,theres allot of hassle to go through to play games on the computer that people may not want to put up with. I have never found it a problem though, and like I said before, Upgrading for me isn't a problem. Besides, For RTS, FPS and Online gaming, the PC is the best for me as I have yet to play a decent game from those three genres on a console.

Y the hell did he call the PC a console. Ahhh I'm chokin on my own rage here. PC's are better than any console BUT, I think Die Hard Vendetta is absolutely gonna kick buttox. Its out next week. Have you seen the screenshots, they're amazing. You can grab enemies by surprize and hold them hostage but if its just a lowly grunt all the others will blast him good so you have to take commander guys hostage. But I think It might get a low score. Usually all the games that try to do cool things like that fail. I mean the Nakatomi plaza game wasn't very good.

Belldandy wrote:
> By run well I meant with everything turned on. If you can't experience
> a game as it was meant to be whats the point ?

I quote Tim Sweeny, Lead programmer of the ut2003 engine:
"Hardware that runs UT2003 at a steady 60 fps hasn´t shipped yet ... when Unreal Tournament shipped, it ran at 30 fps on the average PC, and around 45 fps on the then top-of-the-line PC´s available. This trend will continue with UT2003, shipping a game that´s quite leading-edge at the time of its release, realizing that in a year most new PC´s will run it at 60 fps."

I've found this to be fairly true, my dad's box is over 2 years old now, not upgraded, and runs it ok. Mine is more recent, not top of the line, but performing well, but we stil wont see hardware to cope with it with settings flicked on to highest until at least the NV30. Personally, I'm not that bothered, meka's right that you do generally get a machine with a greater lifespan for fewer notes if you go with consoles, but I prefer pcs and am happy to pay for upgrades..

Meka Dragon wrote:
> PC is not a console. It's a PC.

Indeed, but it's not just a PC...it's an Ultimate Gaming Machine, obviously if you have the right specs.

i dont know m8 i only know what i read & what i post.

By run well I meant with everything turned on. If you can't experience a game as it was meant to be whats the point ? PS2 may not have 1024/768 res but everyone with a PS2 experiences the game more or less the same without having to tweak options. And why does the PC version of GTA3 need such a relatively high spec to run well when it still, even on max settings, doesn't look much better than the PS2 version ? Developers for the PCare lazy and it shows.

~~Belldandy~~