Maybe if you can play any game in a console's history on the current consoles the games would be as good since on the PC games still get compared to games 15 years ago, and with a good reason. Why do you think that multiplat games are rates lower on the PC than on the console?

The best games of all time are on PC, huh? We'll agree to disagree.

Multiplat games rate lower on PC, because they come out later, and launch buggy.

Also, this isn't about "current gen" consoles. I've stated that I'm discussing console gaming in general, vs the PC. That's why my lists are so epic. I'm able to pull out a hundred fantastic AAA games, and you are having to combat me with 5 or 6. It's a stacked deck, and that's why I formed my argument like I did.

Next, PC exclusives get compared to PC games from 10 years ago, because PC "fans" don't have many exclusives worth touting, right now, nor have they for a while. Thus, old favorites become gaming legends. PC exclusive content is declining, but console content in general has been on a significant upswing lately.

....that said, what about that last guy? I'd reported him in hopes he would get banned, but he just called BOTH of us ignorant and insulted the entire forum, on top of completely trolling by not interjecting anything substinative in his post.

I'd keep this shit up just to piss him off, but now we're really just arguing our opinions about which games are better, Half-Life or Zelda.(BTW, the best game of all time is Zelda, and yeah, you can pick one).

So, since honestly its subjective at this point in the argument...I think the argument is finished, and ban mudface, imo. I'm not gonna forget that name.

Multiplat games rate lower on PC because of higher standards.  "AAA" titles on consoles are actually pretty shitty PC games (Halo?).

Sorry, but the better games and players are on PC, period.  The games aren't dumbed down (Civ IV vs Civ Rev) and the skill level is higher (Quake/Starcraft vs Halo).  There's a reason PC players stick to certain games - maybe cause a lot of games coming out nowadays that are tailored for consoles really just suck or have been done better before?

I'd say the taste of PC gamers is much better cause they don't automatically suck up every crappy game just because it's recent/hyped, unlike console gamers.

The best games of all time are on PC, huh? We'll agree to disagree.

Multiplat games rate lower on PC, because they come out later, and launch buggy.

Also, this isn't about "current gen" consoles. I've stated that I'm discussing console gaming in general, vs the PC. That's why my lists are so epic. I'm able to pull out a hundred fantastic AAA games, and you are having to combat me with 5 or 6. It's a stacked deck, and that's why I formed my argument like I did.

Next, PC exclusives get compared to PC games from 10 years ago, because PC "fans" don't have many exclusives worth touting, right now, nor have they for a while. Thus, old favorites become gaming legends. PC exclusive content is declining, but console content in general has been on a significant upswing lately.

....that said, what about that last guy? I'd reported him in hopes he would get banned, but he just called BOTH of us ignorant and insulted the entire forum, on top of completely trolling by not interjecting anything substinative in his post.

I'd keep this shit up just to piss him off, but now we're really just arguing our opinions about which games are better, Half-Life or Zelda.(BTW, the best game of all time is Zelda, and yeah, you can pick one).

So, since honestly its subjective at this point in the argument...I think the argument is finished, and ban mudface, imo. I'm not gonna forget that name.

So then what about stealth games like MGS, racers like Forza and GT, slashers like Ninja Gaiden and GOW and jrpgs. There are more genres but you get the point. The PC is good for you because apparently all you care about is fps games with good campaigns. For everyone else consoles provide something that pc's have simply not provided for a long time now.

Also on the multiplayer side of fps's some, not all, are just as complex as pc fps's and offer just as much competition. Try playing a pro in their respective games of Halo 3, GoW2, COD4 and so on, I gaurantee you get destroyed. Controllers require far more skill to aim well with than mouses, there is a major learning curve to getting good at shooting in a console fps. Although I admit this isn't true for all fps's since some developers dumb down the games by adding auto aim and magnetism but as far as Halo 3 and GoW2 I can tell you they have minimal assists. Just look at the rankings for the top teams on MLG, the top five teams are always there in some order because their skill is so far and above everyone else's.

Multiplat games rate lower on PC because of higher standards.

Not always. Not usually. However, forgive me for generalizing earlier. Usually games on PC are released later, and with many bugs at launch. This is because of a thing called non-uniform hardware. You see, developers can't optimize games to everyone's rig, so sometimes they miss large bugs that have to be ironed out with a thing called a "patch." When a game is in review code, it doesn't have patches yet, and thus, gets reviewed on the bugged code.

Some games are better on the console, because they don't exist on PC. They are called "exclusives."

"AAA" titles on consoles are actually pretty shitty PC games (Halo?).Epic

Sorry, but the better games and players are on PC, period.

Oh, so you're an elitist who digs ignorant genralizations. I'm glad that you called me ignorant earlier, becuase now that statement has become ironic.

Forgive me, but I'm probably a better player than you at Tekken. Does that make me a better gamer in general? Hmm. interesting. I certainly am more skilled at posting, but then again, I do have a PC, and I play games on it, like The Sims, and World of Warcraft. That is my badge to leetness. My mom plays Peggle on the PC. She must be better than the gamers at Evo, as well. Because it's much easier to own someone at a preplanned, uniform technique based strategy game, than it is to win a championship at Evo.

You really think that twitch gameplay is only relevant on PC? You know there is a country called Japan right?

The games aren't dumbed down (Civ IV vs Civ Rev) and the skill level is higher(lol, skill level is higher) (Quake/Starcraft vs Halo(Virtua Fighter vs Spore?)).  There's a reason PC players stick to certain games(Yep, only exclusives available) - maybe cause a lot of games coming out nowadays that are tailored for consoles(yep, because consoles have beomce popular during the PCs decline, and the games sell really well too, without piracy) really just suck(huh? You'd rather be playing another RTS than LBP?) or have been done better before(nope, they've been done before, not "better" generally. Hardware's improved. Comeon PC fan, graphics and functionality are your talking points, not mine)?

I'd say the taste of PC gamers is much better(because you're a biased PC fan(?)) cause they don't automatically suck up every crappy game(ignorance) just because it's recent/hyped, unlike console gamers(I'll give it to you on that one, PC gamers don't really hype either one of their exclusives.).

Agreed, we have a diagreement on assumptions. Reported, hopefully banned. Zelda is a great game, not the best. Let it end there.

Ok, wow. I'm glad you weren't actually going to posting something good. After your silent indignation, I was actually worried that you might be someone to worry about.

Fortunately, you have succeeded in making the most ignorant, and elitist post on this thread, and further marginalizing, stereotyping, and generalizing the fringe beliefs of the common biased PC fan.

Good work. Maybe next time, you can write my argument for me. You're the best player on my team.

He didn't compare an RTS vs a FPS. He compared Quake vs Halo. Also I'm sorry, just looking at videos of Halo pros vs UT/Quake pros you can notice a huge difference between the two games, and don't even get me into the whole auto-aim that Halo gets. It has created one of the biggest dynasties in video games based on accessability. Same way Wii Sports is even bigger than Halo, are you telling me Wii Sports takes more skills than Halo because it's bigger? I don't think so. It's accessible, and by extnesion it's simple and easy. Only Blizzard has managed to do simple to pic up and hard to master, as shown by Diablo and Starcraft. Also don't give me Counter Strike as an example of skill. Coming from UT2004, all I had to do was get an awp, sit in a corner and look away from flashbangs, then anyone who comes in my LOS is screwed. CS doesn;t take individual skill at all. Also, Half-Life's far reaching story will put any novella etc. in Halo to shame. Halo is an easily accessible, easy to play, shooter. And that's it.

@Zen

Final word, not all games are cheap ports and get poerted later on PCs, even ones with concurrent releases also get lower scores on the PC than the console.