Racing genre is not that big on PC so this far there isn't better looking racing games. That will though change with release of Dirt 2 PC version. (one of the first PC games that uses DX11 features)

Well, unlike certain PC gamers (BTW I have PS3 and Wii and play on 360 also, so I'm not exclusive on PC) I'm not at all bitter about the shift, nor do I see it as anything to mourn.

I want to play games, all sorts of games, and the HW, whether a PC or a console is just the delivery mechanism for me.  I have no trouble moving to consoles, so long as they support varied games, etc. which they are shaping up to do quite nicely.

I think the mod community is a bit more important than you note, because it allows not just for game extensions, some fantastic ideas and a lot of free content, but it also feeds the gaming industry.  Many developers such as Epic, id, Valve, etc. have taken talent that may never have been noticed without mods.

Also, I've enjoyed building levels myself, and I would mourn an environment where I couldn't create my own quest, dialogue, etc. in something like Oblivion or Fallout 3.  For me mods/editors are the last great PC element that needs to cross over to consoles.

BTW I hope you don't mind my post in reply to your images - but trust me, as someone who's coded in the past, and has access to non-gaming, high end graphical programs for architectural design, etc. you never want to post images and imply that a PC couldn't surpass any visual image delivered on a console this gen.

Tangent here, but Dirt 2 is a great game. That brings me to another PC gaming flaw. You end up playing games that console gamers have been playing for months, because developers are afraid of losing sales due to piracy, if they have the same launch date as the PC.

Sure, Dirt 2 will look better than its console counterpart. A lot better, if you consider the relatively small non-generational graphical differences in texture and shadow "a lot."

What about next gen? What if console graphics reach diminishing returns for developers? What advantage would the late PC port have then?

Graphics can only be used as a crutch for so long, as inevitably, graphics will become less and less differentiable as the genrations progress. What else does PC gaming bring to the table when you can no longer post screenshots, lol?

IMO it will be difficult for Online Games Devs to Give the game a really good 3D grapics as being an "Online" game there are lots of players who have different kind of computer specs, and that will be a problem to other gamers if they had low spec PC's since 3D graphics really requires a good Video Card having that high end graphics will somehow kill the market, because there are only limited players who can enjoy the, those who owns low end PC's are still potential customers they can be a part of marketing for the game in someways.

Well, my only issue is that you're dealing in graphical theory. Of course a more powerful spec sheet is capable of delivering more powerful graphical specs.

However, I must insist that we deal with real world games. One of the major strengths of the console is that they have those big developers capable of delivering the money and production values that can really push hardware.

The PC gaming argument has always been about "potential." Afterall, only a relative handful of PCs are capable of pushing a game like Warhead to its limits, and those rigs mostly belong to entheusiast gamers.

What about those PCs who can't play a game in HD? They are PCs too.

What about the supercomputer at langley? You COULD make photorealistic graphics on that computer.

However, that doesn't mean that "PC gaming has photorealistic graphics." It just means that a computer somewhere in the world could achieve it with trillions of dollars.

So, really, we have to limit our arguments to the content available. If developers choose their limit on the PC, then that is the reality of PC gaming, and not the potential. Sure, it's ok to speculate about the future, but we can't base our entire argument behind it.

That said, you're pretty astute. I salute your excellent contribution to this thread. I was lucky to find you.

A major flaw with PC gaming is a thing called "uniform hardware."

PCs don't have it.

Consoles have uniform hardware, which allows developers to get a LOT more out the specs. That's why PCs with supposedly 3x the specs of the 360, can't play a game much better. Because the software is universal, and not optimized to any specific hardware.

If PCs had uniform hardware, there would be no requirements for upgrades, more games with locked in framerates, less crashes and bugs, and no compatibility issues.

The more casual a game is, the lower you have to set the standard graphics for that game. With consoles, you can give the most casual game relatively excellent graphics, because you don't have a system specification requirement.

Crysis which was made in 2007 has graphics better than any console to date. I can't imagine Crysis 2 at this point.

The non-uniform hardware is also one of the strengths of PC gaming - if I want a console, I'm pretty well always limited to the same hardware (yeah, different colour, form factor and HDD size, but really, there isn't that much choice). Where as for PC gaming, I could get a cheap 60$ CPU and a 60$ GPU, or I could spend 200$ on each of them.  With PC gaming, you can have much as you're willing to pay for, where as for console gaming, you're limited to one specific experience.

And of course, we're forgetting that a 300$-400$ computer is infinitely more useful than a console of the same price. What am I going to use to write and research my essays? What am I going to use for web browsing? What am I going to use for IM? What am I going to use for burning DVDs and managing my music? And so on.

There's really only one gaming platform that just does everything - and that's the PC, not the PS3, no matter what Sony may try to tell you. :)

And before you use the Bluray argument, Bluray drives aren't exactly expensive nowadays, and moreover, you're looking at read speeds generally several times higher than the PS3's BD drive, as well.

EDIT:  Though I must admit, it is funny to watch the PS360 fans using the same arguments they'd dismiss in Wii vs. PS360 arguments against the PC as a gaming platform.

There are many things better than little graphics upgrade from PC. Like 0.0001% cheaters and achievements for every game.

This is not just an issue of hardware. Building the art assets to show off on top-of-the-range PC is very expensive undertaking. So even if theoretically Game Devs could build incredible-looking games for PCs, they need a financial incentive to do it. Just because you can do it, doesn't mean that it makes sense.