Fun Topic. Which are better for Gaming? PC's or Consoles?

[ZenfoldorVGI]

Without quoting both you guys, I'll respond to all your points:

1. Which controls scheme is "better" for any given game IS subjective, and that is NOT a faulty argument. Some people prefer motion controls in games like Flower, but that is certainly subjective.

2. The problems I've outlined for the PC are inherant to the nature of the machine. Just like having inferior graphics on a console will probably always be true, due to the nature of uniform hardware and console life. The problems inherant to the PC might not be factually insurmountable, but they are part of the nature of the machine, and to fix them, you would have to change its nature.

You can change the nature of a console every 6 years or so.

3. Due to a consoles nature, you can make sure that every console carries your motion controller next gen. If you try to create that broad range of motion controlling content on the PC, you have to sell to a limited audience(those who went out and bought the motion controller). Thus, you won't, nor ever will, have games that uniformly require a motion controller on PC. It's about forcing people to use it. You have to force change. You can't force anything on PC.

4. Interface, library, online intigration, lower prices, ease of upgrading, and lack of service limitation, greater breadth of services, and more, are either subjective or untrue advantages of PC gaming. What is, "lack of service limitation" or "ease of upgrading?" Aren't those buzzwords for "user content" and "don't have to pay for XBL, nor adhere to its bannable issues?" Is this type of micromanagement really the best advantages we can come up with? Truth is, you've got graphics, and user content. IMHO. I didn't mention those others, because they're bullshit, imho. Define those. Nobody can understand precisely what's being discussed with such broad and undefined terms.

5. So, computer games have a robust used market? No they don't. I bought every game I've ever played on an HD console for under 20 dollars, or I rented it from Gamefly. Rent a lot of computer games?

6. The PC is lacking in high budget exclusive content this generation. Blizzard is certainly a boon, but mentioning them only proves my point. Just one company with 2 games a generation?

7. Technical barriers to PC gaming entry are still large, unless you pay out the ass. That's not arguable. They might decrease over time, but a console is plug and play, if you understand that meaning doesn't always mean you don't have to install a game. Technical barriers to entry mean that PC gaming isn't for everyone atm.

8. Entrance price on a PC that can run Crysis on high is about 500 bucks, assuming you build it yourself and pirate an OS. That's more expensive. Also, you can't rent the games, can't buy them used, and no one who is able to build a PC is going to go for the cheapest piece of shit they can possibly throw together that will play Crysis. I spend about 800 bucks on my PC and it's obsolete, won't play GTA4 worth ass, and will eventually need upgrading before the next set of consoles is released? It will, however, play crysis on very high. Crysis isn't a CPU centric game.

Also, how is the technical barrier to PC gaming low, if people have to build it themselves?

It's either expensive and complex, or very expensive, and easy.

Is that not true?

9. Developers are retreating from their DRM experiment and moving to downloadable content. Again, developers are starting to add mouse and keyboard support to console games. Fact is, DRM is a problem in PC gaming, and your article doesn't refute that, nor does it diminish it. It will always be a problem in one form or another. It is required to combat piracy. Perhaps the bigger problem is "piracy." You can just change is to "piracy" in your mind if that helps.

10. You can hook up several consoles all at once just like a lan party. You can't manya PC game via splitscreen, last time I checked. Lan part is not local multiplayer.

11. The PC had many, many more advantages over consoles 10 years ago, than it does now(exclusives galore, much, much better graphics), and it also had several disadvantages that are now fixed(crappy joystick options, stationary, ect).

12. In fact, once graphics reach photo realism, PC gaming will have almost no claim to superiority, assuming it doesn't fix some of its more serious issues. I mean, some games do have user made content on consoles. That doesn't mean that a console has a claim to user made content. Just like some PC games will have motion controls. Most won't though.

13. Console games are developed more efficiently to take advantage of uniform hardware over a generation. PC games require upgrades, as you've said. Sometimes, platform junking upgrades, like to the CPU.

14. The negatives of PC gaming have actually decreased(as I've stated, but the negatives of console gaming have also decreased drastically). However, you contradict yourself. You say the PC gaming problems inherant to the machine are just as temporary as the console problems inherant to the 360 and PS3. That's wrong. Every few years, you can reinvent a console. You can never reinvent the PC, and that's a negative, not a positive, my friend.

15. Console gaming has decreased its major faults drastically over the past 10 years. You've just said that most of the PC problems still exist.

Obviously, some of my points are dead on accurate and some are absolute bullshit, but you unfortunately scritinized every one. Pick the ones I'm wrong on, and it'll make your post seem more unbiased. I'm obviously not unbiased. I have had several bad experiences with PC gaming, and I find that I worry about my framerate more than I enjoy playing on this device. So, despite the PC elitism, I've chosen to stand up for my beliefs. Why are you biased towards PC gaming? Perhaps you explaining your side of things would help me understand your mindset in these debates?