| ZenfoldorVGI said:
No it's not. Quite simply, it's all opinion. Don't talk to me about potential. It's absoultely the most rediculious thing I've ever heard to suggest that the mass market should simply hook their computers up to their HDTV's to play the game. You are talking about "potential." Well, potential is theoretical, you see? About 1 in a thousand people who play Fallout 3 will play it on PC, with a controller, hooked up to a HDTV with 5.1 sound from their couch. What is most likely is PC owners will play Fallout 3 just like they play every other game. If we want to talk about potential, the best console to play Fallout 3 on is the supercomputer in Langley. Certainly, the version with the most versatility and potential is the PC version. However, the PC version is missing 2 features that are exclusive to the Xbox 360. The PC version would also cause many people to need to upgrade their consoles...or buy 5 dollar cables, or whatever. It's just as ignorant and meaningless to talk about the best potential play experience as it is to talk about the best potential console. We're dealing with what's there, and with what's here, for people on this forum, who own a mediocre PC, a 360, and a PS3....the best option by far is the 360 version. Not the version with the most potential. The 360 version of Fallout 3 might not be the best version...but it is the best option for most people here. What we're gaining with the PC version is user mods, and graphics. What most people would be losing is time, money, work, DLC, and effort. My point was, even I, who has spend nearly a thousand dollars building a badass PC capable of playing Crysis, would still have to spend more time, money, and effort to play the game like I want to. With my $249 Xbox 360, it's plug and play, already set up like I want it(with exclusive dlc). It's just not feasable, nor is it worth it for a small graphical upgrade and user-mods. Sure, the best potential version of the game is for the PC, played on the Langley supercomputer.. However, in the real world, the mass market would probably rather just have the copy of the game that runs on the Xbox 360. "Best" is an opinion and it always will be. Now, before Shio or Nazna show up, let me say this: PC gaming is awesome, and with a willing pocketbook, it has the potential to be the only contender for "best gaming platform." However, you know what I'm talking about, so don't even start, please. It is also my opinion that the PS3 is the worst option. Wanna comment on that one? You share that opinion, obviously, or I woulda already heard about it. |
Wow. That might be one of the dumbest arguments I have heard in a long time.
Your argument is cost. If that's the case, every multi-plat game that comes out on both the PS2 or the PS3/360, is by default better on the PS2. Who cares about the game. It cost less to play it, thus it's better.
Not everyone has YOUR setup. For some people, a 21" monitor on there disk that can play the game at 1920x1080 is far better then any TV they can afford (you can buy one of those at NewEgg right now for $230). We can go back and forth about hardware setups all day long.
But Bethesda doesn't make hardware, they make games. One game will:
- Play at better frame rates
- Probably have a better save system
- Load faster
- Have better textures
- Have a better control scheme (I am sure the PC will work with the 360 controller if you want).
- Play at a higher resolution.
- The list goes on.
That version is better. Sorry that you can't see that.
