Rainbird said:
Not that I care to get into this discussion, but I would like to hear you justify the comparison with super computers. In my head, comparing PCs to consoles with respect to gaming makes sense, seeing as they both play games, but comparing super computers to PCs with respect to gaming doesn't, seeing as super computers don't do gaming. So please do explain the reasoning to me. |
Isn't the subject just graphics king? =P
I turned this PC thing into derision to illustrate a point.
People keep saying that PC is king, yet PCs are constantly evolving. That's just a given that graphics would be better on PCs, from a purely technical point of view.
When it comes to consoles, they're set in stone. They're not evolving, or different depending on how much money you put into them.
So when you're comparing the HD consoles, you're doing it to see which of those console designs, created with parts from the same time, actually ended up being the better one. Adding PC in the argument is completely stupid [and redundant] if you ask me. And when we say "this gen" we mean "this console generation". PCs are not consoles. And besides, can anyone say which gen the PCs are in right now? Not the same as the HD consoles, that's for sure.







