PC Games vs Consoles

[Midgar Mist]

Do you prefer playing on a PC or cavorting on a console?

Im very firmly within the console camp.

-Consoles are straightforward pieces of equipment with interesting games

-PCs are largely dull overly complex pieces of equipment that cry and moan every time you want to add a more interesting expansion pack even if the OS is well within the date of the game release. It cannot cope it says "no my drivers cannot handle it, im a weakass wimp! Upgrade me for the love of God upgrade me!"

and even if you have the internet on it, PCs take too much time and effort to get sorted just to play one more lousy expansion pack

the reason im so vitriolic at the moment is cause im trying to play the sims 2 pets on my 2010 Windows Vista, previously added drivers from its former owner all added, and it STILL crashes like a whiny technological baby.

But enough about my problems, please soothe me with your im sure very much calming and Zen opinions.

[Spuuky]

There is literally nothing a console can do that a PC can't do; so I prefer a PC.

[Madame Adequate]

e; Not true Spuuky, consoles can RROD much better than PCs!

I do like consoles a lot, but I've been pretty much a dedicated PC player the last few years. It's just so convenient, and I can just hit alt-tab and do an incredible number of other stuff with ease.

[Psychotic]

I get a great deal of enjoyment out of both.

[Vermachtnis]

The PC doesn't even have a character in Neptunia.

[Ayen]

Consoles because that's what I mainly grew up with and am comfortable with.

[Fox]

sims 2 pets on my 2010 Windows Vista

There's your problem! The order of preference goes like this:

PC > Console > Living life on a farm without video games or electricity > Windows Vista.

I like my consoles, and I like many of the games that are console exclusive. But in terms of hardware, PC is more versatile and better in basically every way. And I'd argue the backwards compatibility is better for the most part as well. I mean yeah, if I have a CD-ROM from 1997 I may struggle for a while with drivers and resolution mods and what have you, but 9 times out of 10 I'll at least be able to play the thing on my modern OS. But then I look at my consoles, I can't event play PS3 games on my PS4. So... I'd rather have the faff with drivers than get locked out of playing the game entirely.

And of course, between Steam and GoG it's becoming less and less of a hassle to keep things working long term. GoG is great for super old games as it packs all the necessary driver stuff in with the executable, so you just click and play.

[Ayen]

Yeah, anyone who has Vista should consider upgrading to Windows 7 at least. I have it, it works wonders, never have any issues with it. My parents use Vista too and it gives them a new problem pretty much everyday. Some of it may be due to my dad's inexperience, but I know the OS doesn't help matters.

[Fynn]

Handhelds offer optimum gaming enjoyment.

[Bolivar]

For immersive single player games, nothing beats console with a controller, large HDTV and surround sound. The multiplayer communities are typically a lot bigger, too. Sure, you can plug your comp into a TV but I have a heavy, full ATX tower and it's just not feasible for me to drag it back and forth or route a long wire to the TV. I am interested in buying myself a Steam Link pretty soon and trying that out, though.

I also enjoy playing PC exclusives like Dota, Counter-Strike, Civilization, ARPGs and MMOs, which I wouldn't want to play anywhere else, even if I could. The only real overlap where I choose PC over console are Western RPGs, where the ability to mod and custom tailor the experience makes PC the best place to play. Occasionally, I do buy older console titles, just to see how they run maxed out at 1080 or 1440p and 144fps.

Sorry to hear about your problems with Sims pets, getting older favorites to run can be pretty frustrating at times.

[Mirage]

-PCs are largely dull overly complex pieces of equipment that cry and moan every time you want to add a more interesting expansion pack even if the OS is well within the date of the game release. It cannot cope it says "no my drivers cannot handle it, im a weakass wimp! Upgrade me for the love of God upgrade me!"

and even if you have the internet on it, PCs take too much time and effort to get sorted just to play one more lousy expansion pack

the reason im so vitriolic at the moment is cause im trying to play the sims 2 pets on my 2010 Windows Vista, previously added drivers from its former owner all added, and it STILL crashes like a whiny technological baby.

Buying and installing a game through steam is actually simpler than doing the same via the playstation store on PS3 or PS4. PC gaming with Steam isn't complex at all. If you haven't used that service before, I recommend that you give it a try. There's no Sims on Steam, though, as that's an EA game and they have their own competing service.

The Sims 2 (an 3 for that matter) however, is a complete clustersmurf when it comes to add-ons and expansions. It can seriously take like 5 hours to install all of it, but these games are more like anomalies, not really the standard, and definitely not comparable to recent PC games.

Whether I play on PC or on a console depends largely on the control scheme the game uses. I can't stand aiming with a gamepad, so games where i do so will always be played on PC. Likewise, most strategy games are way easier to play with a mouse and keyboard, and the same goes for most oldschool western RPGs.

That said, whenever I play a game from a console older than the PS2, I probably emulate it on a PC anyway, with a gamepad connected of course.

[CactuarKing]

I grew up a PC gamer before PS1 and found them to be fiddly and nightmarish unless you had the EXACT settings for "FILES=" and "BUFFERS="and stuff like that.

Since PS1 - It has been consoles (especially SONY consoles for me all they way as I lack patience and prefer to just pop a game in and be able to play it.

I can SEE how theoretically PC would be better as it offers unlimited customisability, but to get a top end gaming PC would cost more than a console and would need to be constantly upgraded, whereas my PS4 will continue to play games that I put into it without me having to upgrade it.

PC games are cheaper though.

[Fox]

I can SEE how theoretically PC would be better as it offers unlimited customisability, but to get a top end gaming PC would cost more than a console and would need to be constantly upgraded, whereas my PS4 will continue to play games that I put into it without me having to upgrade it.

While you're correct that a good PC is more expensive than a console - sometimes substantially so - the 'constant upgrades' thing doesn't really apply. Yes, you'd need to do that if you wanted it to stay 'top of the line' forever, but that would be like buying a high end car and then trading it in for a slightly faster high end car a year later. Most of the time, you'll keep the same car for years and years.

I bought my gaming PC in 2012 (at about 3 times the cost of a PS4 - as I said the initial expense is a perfectly valid criticism!) and haven't upgraded it since. It'll still play pretty much every new game on 'High' graphics settings and outperforms the consoles. And as the games get tougher and tougher on the system I can just turn the settings down more and more instead of upgrading, and when I do upgrade in another few years it'll probably just be a graphics card, not a whole PC.

And of course - why would I need to upgrade? The majority of big games also come out on console, therefore they're somewhat limited by the consoles. I doubt very much something will come out on both console and PC that my PC won't be able to handle, so I should be good until the end of this console generation.

[Mirage]

That's true. You only need to upgrade if you want to stay on the bleeding edge of performance and quality. If you're budget-minded, you can almost always get away with building something that costs slightly more than a current gen console when it is new, and it will most likely run all multiplatform titles until the end of that console generation.

Eurogamer even has a "PC-that-equals-consoles-for-close-to-same-price" build, and tests new games up against the console versions every now and then. It's a bit of a mixed bag, but it is extremely rare for that PC to end up with less performance than an X1, and also pretty uncommon that it is significantly behind PS4.

When DX12 hits, I actually think the PC version of multiplatform games will get even a bit better relative to console versions, especially those PCs that have a discrete card combined with an integrated CPU. There are a few post-processing tasks that can be handled by intel's integrated graphics adapters, and probably even more things that could be handled by one of AMD's integrated GPUs.

Additionally, CPU requirements are projected to drop by a significant amount (I'm hearing 20% in most cases) because of the more efficient API. At the same time, all the same games still have the same CPU power limit on PS4 and for the most part also XB1, so developers can't throw more stuff at the CPU than before, even if weaker PCs can handle more.

Not to mention, it will be a lot easier to recycle your old graphics card. You don't need to throw it away, you can just let it work in tandem with the new card you buy, even if they are of a different make and performance level.

[Leigh]

Controller and functional TV. Somebody else can work out the other biz. They can turn it on for me...oh and they should bring me tea and biscuits too. Happy gaming!