I'm a PC gamer but the thing that annoys me the most is that Crysis is a useless, shitty game.
I'm a PC gamer but the thing that annoys me the most is that Crysis is a useless, shitty game.
But But Ps3 owners wont have anything to talk about then lol jk...kinda
JayWood2010 said:
|
LOL I was only kidding. That is the things you hear in the other threads that gfx can't get better, only thing left to improve is AI physics etc..
Basically, console gamers need to accept their sculpted human interface devices for their tailor-made games, and stop trying to fit into Dad's Wet-look Posing Pouch / Mum's Crotchless Knickers.
WHERE IS MY KORORINPA 3
| MDMAlliance said: Also, consoles have more freedom of creativity than PCs. |
I can create a siimple flash game on PC while typing this.
I can make whatever I want with a PC, there is no limits.
Consoles on the other hand, you have to have a devkit, and you have to be sure that it actually runs on the system, you also have to have approval from Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft , you have to pay them in return , you have to be following their rules,you have to have to wait till they give you a greenlight to finish it, you have to wait till they give you the greenlight to patch it and publish it, if you don't get anything out of it, its not their problem, you also are limited to their input metiods . for example you can't create a game on PS3 that uses a third party controller that uses for example a keyboard or touch screen, on PC you can do whatever you want.
so by that , you really think consoles "offer" more freedom of creativity than PCs? , why do you think mods exist for PCs and not Consoles (for the most part) ? , why are PC patches can be done by non developers and can be released faster and more frequent on PCs ?
It is often funny how I hear people arguing why PC are always superior to consoles. And then I think about all the brilliant games that the PC never got from developers like Square-Enix, Capcom and Konami or Sonys first party. And somehow I always see comparisons of Shooters.
Ok, the PC may have more potential because you can upgrade your PC every week if you want while a console is a fixed set. But what is this potential worth if it is not getting most of the great games? Give me a comparison shot of Final Fantasy XIII... Uncharted 3... Heavy Rain...
For me, the PS3 graphics are about fine. I do not think that further consoles will benefit much from better graphics. If I have a PS3 and a PS4 and the same game would come out on both console, I might even get the cheaper version for the PS3. Its the same thing with DVD or BluRay. If I have to choose between the DVD or Bluray Version I would only choose the Bluray for my favourite movies and go with the DVD almost all the time because it only cost half. I do not benefit by going HD or the benefit is no longer worth the price tag.
So if someone says that the PS4 could be the last console I might even agree. But that doesnt mean that the PS4 couldn't have a life cycle of 20 years or so.
| JayWood2010 said: First off if you are going to call me a fanboy then you can call me a Halo, Metal Gear Solid, Uncharted, and Gears fanboy. Just because I have a logo of two microsoft mascots does not mean im a fanboy of the 360. Just means I like those games just like I had a logo of MGS4 before. |
Yeah we get it, it is one game on pc. The game is boring though, not even GOTY worthy. Give me Uncharted 2 any day. That is one thing pc will never have, amazing exclusive games.
JayWood2010 said:
|
I am see:

This thread reeks of insecurity. We all know, the current gen consoles cannot compare at all to the pc and they never will.
| Alphachris said: It is often funny how I hear people arguing why PC are always superior to consoles. And then I think about all the brilliant games that the PC never got from developers like Square-Enix, Capcom and Konami or Sonys first party. And somehow I always see comparisons of Shooters. Ok, the PC may have more potential because you can upgrade your PC every week if you want while a console is a fixed set. But what is this potential worth if it is not getting most of the great games? Give me a comparison shot of Final Fantasy XIII... Uncharted 3... Heavy Rain... For me, the PS3 graphics are about fine. I do not think that further consoles will benefit much from better graphics. If I have a PS3 and a PS4 and the same game would come out on both console, I might even get the cheaper version for the PS3. Its the same thing with DVD or BluRay. If I have to choose between the DVD or Bluray Version I would only choose the Bluray for my favourite movies and go with the DVD almost all the time because it only cost half. I do not benefit by going HD or the benefit is no longer worth the price tag. So if someone says that the PS4 could be the last console I might even agree. But that doesnt mean that the PS4 couldn't have a life cycle of 20 years or so. |
i dunno dude,tech will move fast,that's one thing i know,a 20 year PS4 :),we'll probably be gaming through our eyelids in 20 years time
OT yes it looks nice,poor old squirtle though as someone said
Well look at how long cinema or TV are around. Technic and Special Effects have become better, but that does not say that Movies or TV has gone obsolete. Well, people are not all over HD here in Austria/Germany and most TV channels still do not broadcast everything in HD. 3D Cinema or 3D TV hasn't also really picked up here. Note every new technology has benefits for the masses... The technical advance only made TV sets cheaper and most people do not bother with upgrading to new High Tech TVs as long as the old one is running.
It could be the same with the PS3. In 3-5 Years you will probably be able to pick up a PS3 for € 100. Through digital download you get instant access to all the old PS3 classics for € 10-€ 15. The PS3 will be a heavy competitor for the PS4 for years for the mass market segment. The question will be, if the random gamer will be willing to spend € 100-€ 200 more for the new console and €20 - €30 more per game only for the graphical upgrade?