Why consoles are rubbish!

[Clinton]

Crazy talk. As an adult gamer, I just don't have to time to keep up with hardware on PC anymore. I still game on PC but more on my PS3.

 

[Soki]

This IS crazy talk. Spending 1000s on some little upgrade to the next "best" thing for you PC...now that is rubbish. I wouldn't specd so much for jsut a little upgrade of some video card or CPU or any of the such. Thats why I stick with the PS3 and use computers for everyday use. It should be kept that way as it was meant to be. I am just a bit angry, because you call them "rubbish". Can your PC play Blueray without any damn upgrades or theft?

 

[Smith6612]

This IS crazy talk. Spending 1000s on some little upgrade to the next "best" thing for you PC...now that is rubbish. I wouldn't specd so much for jsut a little upgrade of some video card or CPU or any of the such. Thats why I stick with the PS3 and use computers for everyday use. It should be kept that way as it was meant to be. I am just a bit angry, because you call them "rubbish". Can your PC play Blueray without any damn upgrades or theft?

Let me say this now. Consoles from the Xbox 360/Nintendo Wii and below could NEVER play Blu-Ray. The PS3 is the only console out there that plays Blu-Ray, and that is over a year old. Around the same time, the PC Blu-Ray drive came out, and they were selling cheaper than PS3s. Now, sticking onto the age issue, many PC owners don't bother to get the next big thing all the time, and probably 99% of the people are still running their original hardware since 4-5 years ago which was only capable of running DVD and 720p video. If you are a previous console owner, you would have to "upgrade" yourself to a new PS3 from whatever you had, or get a Blu-Ray player for your TV and wire it via HDMI. On the PC, you can pop in a Blu-Ray drive into a PC with decent video power and CPU power from 4 years ago and it will run flawlessly (with hardware acceleration obviously). No need to go out and buy a whole new thing. My old GeForce 440MX system from 6 years ago manages 720p video flawlessly with hardware acceleration (30% CPU usage) and has enough power to get by with 1080p video. Those that didn't bother to go out and get a fast PC at the time back then, not my fault. That Geforce 440MX system only cost me $300 to make back then.

@skai123: The reason many PC games don't use muiltithreading is mainly because of the variance in config from PCs and consoles. However, it's also on behalf of some laziness of developers as well. Some don't even bother to try multithreading PC games in a matter of fact. They just add "dual core" support which doesn't really do anything honestly, even with the process affinity set for all CPUs.

 

[paranoidfish]

I wouldn't say they're rubbish, I prefer playing certain genres on a PC such as RTS - an RTS on a console is usually unworkable. But I still have my consoles and still play them from time to time.

 

[skai123]

please give proof of your comment, as i find it hilariously wrong. since you don't need expensive licenses to develop games on computers, you'll get all the indie developers/studios that can't afford them or simply believe that the pc is the superior gaming platform.

http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?...s&dlx_type=all&sortdir=asc&official=all%20%BB you will see that pc has 215 pages of games compared to 22 pages on xbox 360 and 13 for ps3. although a sorta bad example because pc games have been around so much longer than xbox 360 or a playstation 3.

another example i will provide is gamerankings. searching over the past 12 months for the pc, since the limit is 200 results, the list ends as #200 on a title starting with D. on xbox 360, the list ends at J, and on ps3, the list ends at T

like u stated since the list of games for pc goes way back when. you should also include NES,Snes etc games and what not, since u can get those on Wii. also PS1, PS2, Xbox, etc.
Edit:

@skai123: The reason many PC games don't use muiltithreading is mainly because of the variance in config from PCs and consoles. However, it's also on behalf of some laziness of developers as well. Some don't even bother to try multithreading PC games in a matter of fact. They just add "dual core" support which doesn't really do anything honestly, even with the process affinity set for all CPUs.

Thanks for proving my point again, whats the point of power it it's not utilized 100%?

It's like having a ferrari and having a limit at 80km/h when you can have a car that does 120km/h which can also go on the highway...
bad example but u get my point...

 

[xPlozion]

like u stated since the list of games for pc goes way back when. you should also include NES,Snes etc games and what not, since u can get those on Wii. also PS1, PS2, Xbox, etc.

another example i will provide is gamerankings. searching over the past 12 months for the pc, since the limit is 200 results, the list ends as #200 on a title starting with D. on xbox 360, the list ends at J, and on ps3, the list ends at T

that includes ALL arcade/virtual console/psn w/e games as well...

also, don't forget the low budget pc games that don't even get listed...

Thanks for proving my point again, whats the point of power it it's not utilized 100%?

It's like having a ferrari and having a limit at 80km/h when you can have a car that does 120km/h which can also go on the highway...
bad example but u get my point...

ok, even if it might be a bad example, would you rather have the ferarri or a minivan (if you could afford both). the ferrari being the pc and the minivan being the xbox/ps3

give it time, and ALL developers won't be lazy, and supporting multiple cpu's will be a common practice. also, with proper management, you could have the other processes run on another cpu so the game has the whole core to itself (if that's possible... i'm just talking out of my ass right now )

 

[rayminator]

on a computer you can modify your game has you like to be

on console it hard to modify a game has you want it's because lot of us can't afford the part to modify the console first to read the burnt cd/dvd

 

[Smith6612]

Thanks for proving my point again, whats the point of power it it's not utilized 100%?

I'm not trying to prove your point honestly. As we've all stated before, consoles all have a general hardware specification. Consoles these days pretty much all use more than one CPU core, much like modern PCs these days. Just like on the PC, a console's power isn't fully utilized, at least not 100% all the time as such is the nature of any computer program. That's just the nature of the game. Take the PS3 for example though in my view. Ever since the new Cell processor came out and the PS3 has been sold, developers have been having a tough time even trying to figure out how to fully utilize a PS3's potential, especially of that cell processor, and they still are having some issues on pulling out the new potential of a PS3. On the Xbox 360 which is pushed heavilly by Microsoft towards the developers, because the 360 is running three processor cores, the game developers are offloading different things such as Physics, AI, and the game itself onto each different core, which is essentially Multithreading. Now, getting to my point on developer laziness vs. money, Because the Xbox itself has been such a huge selling console, developers have more incentive to push for that extra step and code proper multithreading support which actually works as they know that the better the game is designed, the more money they can rake in.

On the PS3, it's not the developer's fault on being lazy. It's simply due to the architecture of the console which makes it harder to code the game for, but they have been able to hit quite a bit of potential on the Ps3. Since the Xbox has been out for some time and it's basically using PC hardware in it (some of which is custom such as the ATi GPU in it), it's esentually easy for a developer to add multithreading support, as it's basically OS + Known Hardware, not New hardware + OS like the PS3. So essentually, the argument comes down to in performance, is the developer's lack of care for multithreading support in a PC. As I've said before, just adding "dual core support" isn't enough for a game, as those barely do a thing if anything, even with full processor affinity and a high end Dual/Quad/i7. Instead of developers just multithreading Xbox 360 games or working on whatever the PS3 has, PCs should be just as easy to multithread despite the differences in hardware/software. Developers can go as far back a a Pentium 4 HT processor, which is considered a dual core chip.

So yes, it's pure laziness on the developer for not making the PC games perform how they should. Multithreading does have a huge difference in the framerates of games. But might I also mention, with consoles, typically they have games that are:

1: More Optimized
2: Have slightly degraded texture quality
3: NO ANTIALIASING
4: Fairly good Antistrophic filtering
5: less RAM.

The benefits that a PC has over a console are:
1: Modding
2: That untapped power (developer laziness for the most part)
3: The ability to upgrade it cheaply
4: The huge workforce behind a PC
5: Larger support of HID devices without hacking or modding
6: OS of choice as well as better support for downloadable content (if you don't believe me, I'll send you a PM of something to try installing to a console that has The Orange Box).
7: Ability for user to troubleshoot every aspect of it, from hardware to software issues, as well as the ability to "debrick" hardware, and replace/upgrade hardware as needed

And looking back at one of your older posts, you said that the PSU kills your hardware when it dies. You should know that this same instance does happen with consoles. And unlike the pre-built PCs or consoles, you can control what goes into the PC, not so on consoles where you may or may not know if the PSU is a cheapo, a really good one, or one that is highly inefficient. Unless you're buying POS power supplies that are known to fry the motherboard every time they croak or from budget/poor OEM builders who put in cheapo hardware (eMachines anyone?), I can see why you said that. However, I've had a couple very durable power supplies fry on me due to brownouts, and not once have any of the systems I've worked on or own have any component fry. One such system I have which is 11 years old had this happen to it, and it still runs great to this day, acting as a Linux server/router. All it took was a replacement PSU and it was all set to go, plus I get the parts overnight'ed as well.

For sending back dead/blown parts that are still under warranty that has not been broken due to things like overclocking, a simple RMA is all that is needed, and I can have a new part within 2-3 days tops, not waiting weeks to ship a console, wait for it to be repaired, and then be at the mercy of the company repairing it to ship it back when they decide.

I'm not a console hater, but read my previous posts once more. I have enough ground on my end to cover my opinion of "PCs are better for gaming." As per price, sure consoles are convenient and all and tend to be cheaper for the gaming value, when it comes down to getting that HDTV + overpriced HDMI cables, you're already talking a full blown mid-range gaming rig in terms of price. The consoles are generally cheaper though as they're subsidized by advertisements (ever see the Xbox Live Dashboard? Yes, there are ads and Netflix is a player in it). PCs, however from OEMs and such are not subsidized by the crapware that goes into them at all. You're paying for the hardware + labor + shipping to get the PC to you, and the trialware/crapware all goes to the OEM for advertising of their machines and so fourth.

 

[xPlozion]

better support for downloadable content (if you don't believe me, I'll send you a PM of something to try installing to a console that has The Orange Box).

lol, that's funny because orange box promised dlc for it, especially team fortress, but i have yet to see anything (last i checked).

 

[skai123]

I'm not a console hater, but read my previous posts once more. I have enough ground on my end to cover my opinion of "PCs are better for gaming." As per price, sure consoles are convenient and all and tend to be cheaper for the gaming value, when it comes down to getting that HDTV + overpriced HDMI cables, you're already talking a full blown mid-range gaming rig in terms of price. The consoles are generally cheaper though as they're subsidized by advertisements (ever see the Xbox Live Dashboard? Yes, there are ads and Netflix is a player in it). PCs, however from OEMs and such are not subsidized by the crapware that goes into them at all. You're paying for the hardware + labor + shipping to get the PC to you, and the trialware/crapware all goes to the OEM for advertising of their machines and so fourth.

There's no ads on XMB. but there's ads in PS home tho, those billboard stuff.

 

[Smith6612]

There's no ads on XMB. but there's ads in PS home tho, those billboard stuff.

I just asked a friend who has an Xbox 360. He isn't aware of any ads at the moment, but he did note that before NXE was rolled out, there were in fact ads on the Xbox 360. The PS3, Home of course is going to have them . That's been a feature known for roughly a year now.

 

[Parsa44]

Take another guess...

Even the PSP can be use go on the internet.
Same with PS3.
You can view photos, listen to music, watch videos, go surf on the web, folding@home, video/voice chat...

Funny you say that because right now consoles are becoming more like "computers"...
With PS3 you can install Linux and do all that other crap you stated...

Yes but is it possible to design a website? Script a piece of PHP.

Computers are much more versatile, i know you can surf the net with a PSP some visitors to my website acessed it via a PSP!

 

[Smith6612]

Yes but is it possible to design a website? Script a piece of PHP.

Computers are much more versatile, i know you can surf the net with a PSP some visitors to my website acessed it via a PSP!

It actually is possible to do that on a console that has a web browser, given the fact that the scripting program is web based, and the browser JavaScript and AJAX info is good enough. It's just not practical/doesn't run very well due to the crappy browsers on consoles. If anything, the Nintendo Wii may have a better browser than the PSP/PS3. I know the PSP uses NetFront, which is basically similar to Netscape/mobile phone browser, however it's JavaScript implementation is shotty at best.

 

[mattura]

Wow, there are some really good arguments coming out here - well done people!
I find the ONLY advantage of consoles are how easy they are to play multi-player games on one system. I have my xbox360, but I don't play it unless friends/family are around. I know I can always play online, but it's better when you play with people you know (even if they are a completely different skill level!!!)
I can't understand why there are so many single player games for the 360. Multiplayer versatility is the way forward for consoles! I like PCs more for anything else.

 

[skai123]

It actually is possible to do that on a console that has a web browser, given the fact that the scripting program is web based, and the browser JavaScript and AJAX info is good enough. It's just not practical/doesn't run very well due to the crappy browsers on consoles. If anything, the Nintendo Wii may have a better browser than the PSP/PS3. I know the PSP uses NetFront, which is basically similar to Netscape/mobile phone browser, however it's JavaScript implementation is shotty at best.

Like i said, install linux on PS3. use firefox or w.e browser u like that works on linux.

you can connect any usb/wireless mouse/keyboard to ps3 and it will work.

 

[Smith6612]

Like i said, install linux on PS3. use firefox or w.e browser u like that works on linux.

you can connect any usb/wireless mouse/keyboard to ps3 and it will work.

Well yeah, but then that involves some slight hacking to the PS3, which does void the warranty. Not many people are willing to hack their PS3 until after the warranty is up as those become void if you change the operating system the last I checked.

 

[Otaku Ichise]

Consoles are worthy to play some jap games like ps2, i realy love the 26 games i have for it, but i didnt pay much for the console, i dont wana pay very much to the crapy Sony consoles that can easily overheat... seriously what is that slim crap for... i wish sony had more feelings for the customer who only wish to play some games that will never exist in a PC, i only congrat company Banpresto for making such great rpgs and i say to Sony that they suck for not using a good cooler for their systems.

 

[devilnest545]

I think all consoles suck expect the ultimate tool the PC.

 

[Wilcox]

I use my console for games, and my computer for all other stuff =P. That simple for me.

 

[gautham]

I don't like to go for consoles because they can only do one thing - GAME.
I prefer having a TV, Console and workstation all in a single box, thankyou.