By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - 5 Reasons PC Gaming Is Better Than Consoles

fordy on 29 November 2012
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:

i did try to call a truce on this debate as we will never agree and this will otherwise continue till xmass 2020, basically im not giving in as such im just fed up of arguing with you about emulation as we cant seam to come to a comprimise unless this is a comprimise.


You're classing a PC port as emulation, when it's anything but. Emulation requires use of the unmodified binary for the console, not a re-compiled version made FOR the PC. You could see you were heading for a corner and tried to  get out of it with a ridiculous statement such as this. Now you're only digging yourself into a hole.



Around the Network
AndrewWK on 29 November 2012
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
Well if you want your games to look much better then on consoles, you have to upgrade your PC frequently. 


thats not true, unless you buy basic parts and i mean basic $50 graphics card $50 cpu then yes but most PC gamers spend on average $500 every 3 years just to keep their gaming PC in the sweet spot, there are still quite a lot of PC gamers using GTX 480 gpus and 1st gen i5's/i7's, its a common misconception that PC games have to frequently upgrade their computers.

Fuck that if I have to play Assassins Creed 3 on low or medium settings, there almost no difference to consoles then.


thats not my fault your not prepared to spend money buying realistic PC upgrades, if you think a $50 graphics card is ok for gaming you are living in a fantasy world, most people can build a gaming PC to play every pc game to date at medium to high settings for around $500-$700 which will last them at least 4 years before needing an upgrade.

my PC cost me £1000 only cause i wanted a high spec machine so i can play all PC games on high to ultra settings @ 1080p, after i factor in the amount of money ive spent on consoles since 2005 it works out to more than £1250 so my PC is actually cheaper than all the consoles that i bought yet is at least 10 times more powerful.

I have upgraded my PC last year. I made myself a Highend PC last year. And tell me can you run The Witcher 2 on the highest settings?



Spazzy_D on 29 November 2012

PC also has the most variety and the best variety of input methods. Motion controls, mouse and keyboard, joysticks, classic game controllers through USB converters, fight pads, touch screens, and of course Xbox 360 controller compatibility for those of us used to modern console control schemes.

Long live PC gaming!



Persistantthug on 29 November 2012

Biggest problem with PC gaming, is that in the minds and actions of the AAA industry's game developers and publishers,

PC gaming is largely thought of as SECOND CLASS.

They bring many of their games late (ASSASSINS CREED 3) and other games, sometimes, not at all (RED DEAD REDEMPTION).

Most of the game are in fact ports of the console versions as well.  Sometimes I hear PC gamers sneer how PC gaming is "KING & MASTER" and all of that,

But you most assuredly can't be KING & MASTER and be SECOND CLASS.   That's an oxymoron.



r3tr0gam3r1337 on 29 November 2012
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
Well if you want your games to look much better then on consoles, you have to upgrade your PC frequently. 


thats not true, unless you buy basic parts and i mean basic $50 graphics card $50 cpu then yes but most PC gamers spend on average $500 every 3 years just to keep their gaming PC in the sweet spot, there are still quite a lot of PC gamers using GTX 480 gpus and 1st gen i5's/i7's, its a common misconception that PC games have to frequently upgrade their computers.

Fuck that if I have to play Assassins Creed 3 on low or medium settings, there almost no difference to consoles then.


thats not my fault your not prepared to spend money buying realistic PC upgrades, if you think a $50 graphics card is ok for gaming you are living in a fantasy world, most people can build a gaming PC to play every pc game to date at medium to high settings for around $500-$700 which will last them at least 4 years before needing an upgrade.

my PC cost me £1000 only cause i wanted a high spec machine so i can play all PC games on high to ultra settings @ 1080p, after i factor in the amount of money ive spent on consoles since 2005 it works out to more than £1250 so my PC is actually cheaper than all the consoles that i bought yet is at least 10 times more powerful.

I have upgraded my PC last year. I made myself a Highend PC last year. And tell me can you run The Witcher 2 on the highest settings?


cant be that highend if you can only play assassins creed 3 on low to medium settings!



Current PC build:

Asus Z97I-Plus, i5 4790K @ 4.6ghz, EVGA GTX 980 ACX 2.0 1377/1853/124%, Corsair Vengence Pro 2400mhz 2x 8192mb, Corsair RM850, Corsair H80i, 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD, 750GB Seagate Momentus XT SSHD, 320GB Weston Digital HDD, Corsair 230T, Corsair K50 Raptor, HP XQ500AA mouse, Windows 10 Pro 64bit. iiyama Pro Lite G2773HS 120Hz 1Ms G2G gaming monitor.

Around the Network
r3tr0gam3r1337 on 29 November 2012
fordy said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:

i did try to call a truce on this debate as we will never agree and this will otherwise continue till xmass 2020, basically im not giving in as such im just fed up of arguing with you about emulation as we cant seam to come to a comprimise unless this is a comprimise.


You're classing a PC port as emulation, when it's anything but. Emulation requires use of the unmodified binary for the console, not a re-compiled version made FOR the PC. You could see you were heading for a corner and tried to  get out of it with a ridiculous statement such as this. Now you're only digging yourself into a hole.


now you are just being childish, i thought you were mature enough to accept but clearly your not, im not going to argue with you im just going to ignore your stupidity.



Current PC build:

Asus Z97I-Plus, i5 4790K @ 4.6ghz, EVGA GTX 980 ACX 2.0 1377/1853/124%, Corsair Vengence Pro 2400mhz 2x 8192mb, Corsair RM850, Corsair H80i, 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD, 750GB Seagate Momentus XT SSHD, 320GB Weston Digital HDD, Corsair 230T, Corsair K50 Raptor, HP XQ500AA mouse, Windows 10 Pro 64bit. iiyama Pro Lite G2773HS 120Hz 1Ms G2G gaming monitor.

AndrewWK on 30 November 2012
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
Well if you want your games to look much better then on consoles, you have to upgrade your PC frequently. 


thats not true, unless you buy basic parts and i mean basic $50 graphics card $50 cpu then yes but most PC gamers spend on average $500 every 3 years just to keep their gaming PC in the sweet spot, there are still quite a lot of PC gamers using GTX 480 gpus and 1st gen i5's/i7's, its a common misconception that PC games have to frequently upgrade their computers.

Fuck that if I have to play Assassins Creed 3 on low or medium settings, there almost no difference to consoles then.


thats not my fault your not prepared to spend money buying realistic PC upgrades, if you think a $50 graphics card is ok for gaming you are living in a fantasy world, most people can build a gaming PC to play every pc game to date at medium to high settings for around $500-$700 which will last them at least 4 years before needing an upgrade.

my PC cost me £1000 only cause i wanted a high spec machine so i can play all PC games on high to ultra settings @ 1080p, after i factor in the amount of money ive spent on consoles since 2005 it works out to more than £1250 so my PC is actually cheaper than all the consoles that i bought yet is at least 10 times more powerful.

I have upgraded my PC last year. I made myself a Highend PC last year. And tell me can you run The Witcher 2 on the highest settings?


cant be that highend if you can only play assassins creed 3 on low to medium settings!

I wasn´t talking about myself. I was talking about PC gaming in general. And btw I have an Asus ROG Laptop as well.



r3tr0gam3r1337 on 30 November 2012
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
AndrewWK said:
Well if you want your games to look much better then on consoles, you have to upgrade your PC frequently. 


thats not true, unless you buy basic parts and i mean basic $50 graphics card $50 cpu then yes but most PC gamers spend on average $500 every 3 years just to keep their gaming PC in the sweet spot, there are still quite a lot of PC gamers using GTX 480 gpus and 1st gen i5's/i7's, its a common misconception that PC games have to frequently upgrade their computers.

Fuck that if I have to play Assassins Creed 3 on low or medium settings, there almost no difference to consoles then.


thats not my fault your not prepared to spend money buying realistic PC upgrades, if you think a $50 graphics card is ok for gaming you are living in a fantasy world, most people can build a gaming PC to play every pc game to date at medium to high settings for around $500-$700 which will last them at least 4 years before needing an upgrade.

my PC cost me £1000 only cause i wanted a high spec machine so i can play all PC games on high to ultra settings @ 1080p, after i factor in the amount of money ive spent on consoles since 2005 it works out to more than £1250 so my PC is actually cheaper than all the consoles that i bought yet is at least 10 times more powerful.

I have upgraded my PC last year. I made myself a Highend PC last year. And tell me can you run The Witcher 2 on the highest settings?


cant be that highend if you can only play assassins creed 3 on low to medium settings!

I wasn´t talking about myself. I was talking about PC gaming in general. And btw I have an Asus ROG Laptop as well.

at least you did not make the mistake of getting an alienware, thats what gives PC gaming a bad reputation, also for an alienware PC that matches my spec would no doubt cost over £1500.



Current PC build:

Asus Z97I-Plus, i5 4790K @ 4.6ghz, EVGA GTX 980 ACX 2.0 1377/1853/124%, Corsair Vengence Pro 2400mhz 2x 8192mb, Corsair RM850, Corsair H80i, 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD, 750GB Seagate Momentus XT SSHD, 320GB Weston Digital HDD, Corsair 230T, Corsair K50 Raptor, HP XQ500AA mouse, Windows 10 Pro 64bit. iiyama Pro Lite G2773HS 120Hz 1Ms G2G gaming monitor.

fordy on 30 November 2012
pezus said:
@Fordy: Does it matter if it's not 100% the same as it is on consoles if the graphics are better and it's 99% the same thing other than that? To me, emulation is better than playing the original because I don't care about a very very small speed difference you are talking about. Seriously, you should try it some time! Mario in 1080p! Zelda! FFX!


You're making assumptions again. I do play emulators, mostly when it's convenient or such, but I'm still going back to actual hardware also. I'm just syaing, don't bet all your chips on emulators over the dedicated hardware.

On top of speed, there are other things that can never be totally the same. For instance, consoles have control over their DACs for sound and video. Emulators have to trust that the OS hardware abstraction layer can do as much of an accurate job as they can give to it.



fordy on 30 November 2012
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
fordy said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:

i did try to call a truce on this debate as we will never agree and this will otherwise continue till xmass 2020, basically im not giving in as such im just fed up of arguing with you about emulation as we cant seam to come to a comprimise unless this is a comprimise.


You're classing a PC port as emulation, when it's anything but. Emulation requires use of the unmodified binary for the console, not a re-compiled version made FOR the PC. You could see you were heading for a corner and tried to  get out of it with a ridiculous statement such as this. Now you're only digging yourself into a hole.


now you are just being childish, i thought you were mature enough to accept but clearly your not, im not going to argue with you im just going to ignore your stupidity.


Hey, it's not me saying "It's MY take on emulation so it MUST be right. I'm not listening la la la". I'm providing proper logic to this argument, and you need to understand that PORTS such as Dirt 3 do not run on the same binary as the console versions do, therefore they do NOT run by means of interpretation, as emulators do. How exactly is proving your point wrong considered childish? Not answering those points at all is a closer resemblance to that.