PCs vs Consoles

**Travis** · 11-16-2003, 12:43 PM

PCs vs Consoles has been a pretty good debate for some time. I used to play console games all the time, a long time ago. But I'm finding myself straying away from consoles, to play PC games. Maybe it's because I play FPS games alot (which IMO were made only for a mouse). But some racing games. I find that a PC will always be more powerful than the consoles, and be able to do just about anything the consoles can (play games, play DVDs, etc. etc.). I favor PC over any consoles now. With PCs you don't have to upgrade your system very often to play the newest games, and if you do you just have to get a better processor and maybe more ram (maximum of $200). So it's cheaper to upgrade your PC (unless you have to have someone do it for you), than to buy a new console. But that's just my opinion. Also, PC Games allow for expansion packs, downloadable content, and easier online support. The only thing that limits you, is the size of your harddrive. So what are your opinions on it?

**Logan** · 11-16-2003, 12:49 PM

PC will always have an edge over console. The games are cheaper, usually feature online play, and they usually look better. However, some people don't have a PC capable of running modern games, therefore, they turn to consoles. I don't favor one over the other, it's all good.

**Kalnaur** · 11-16-2003, 01:18 PM

PCs are better, yet there will always be console games. the only reason I can see for this is the same reason there are cassette tapes: people still buy them.

On a small side note, Microsoft says that the things they have learned from creating the X-Box will be integrated into the next version of Windows, allowing PC games to be played with little or no install time. At least that's the current rumor.

**itisme** · 11-16-2003, 01:44 PM

I have to agree that PC's are better than consoles everything seems to be more advanced. They have better graphics too, the charecters features are alot easier to recognize. A good way to compare them is to looka t the graphics on The sims for PC and the graphic for sims on PS2, PS2 makes all the shapes distorted and things like that. and like mr. pwickles said there is almost always online playing on PC games. so this is'nt even really a debate because we all agree

Don Francisco · 11-16-2003, 03:47 PM

I play more console games (obviously), although I do play a PC game every once in a while. Although I admit that PCs can do more and have better graphics and all that shizzle, I don't like upgrading them. I'd rather just dump $200 every 5 years for a new console.

**itisme** · 11-16-2003, 04:21 PM

You dont always have to upgrade them

Don Francisco · 11-16-2003, 04:44 PM

You do if you want to play Battlefield 1942, Star Wars Galaxies, and Final Fantasy XI.

**Travis** · 11-16-2003, 05:02 PM

Eh, those aren't very intense games such as UT 2003..

**Logan** · 11-16-2003, 05:12 PM

You know nothing. Battlefield 1942 is the largest RAM whore on the PLANET (or any other planet). I have 512 mb and it's still bitchy.

**Travis** · 11-16-2003, 05:15 PM

yes, but how much CPU does it use? CPU is generally more important than RAM.

**aaron** · 11-16-2003, 08:22 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if someday consoles are taken over by computers. Consoles only still exist because of connections between game production companies and console companies. A computer is capible of everything that a console is with the right equipment.

**itisme** · 11-24-2003, 03:53 PM

yeah they probably will

Don Francisco · 11-24-2003, 05:40 PM

I beg to disagree. Computer games were around before console games, so if there is no need for console games why did they come around in the first place? Although computers are all around better, console games will always be preferred by the mainstream "casual" gamers.

**Logan** · 11-24-2003, 05:51 PM

Agreed. Most people have no interest in purchasing a PC that can play today's game. Hell, a lot of people wouldnt know how to install a PC game like that.