Console vs PC Gaming

[Dragoon Knight]

This is an issue that has been bothering me as of late.  I recently began working at a computer recycling charity, and two colleagues of mine have very different views on the two main gaming platform groups, to the point of completely forsaking the opposing side.

One of them (we shall call him Mr. Green, so as not to name names) is very firmly of the position that PCs are not for playing games on.  He attests that the cost of obtaining (and thereafter upgrading) the hardware required to run high-end or next-gen games is too high to make it a worthwhile investment for games.  Similarly, new operating systems tend to cause problems with older games, with some becoming incompatible on newer iterations of Windows - a friend of mine has had to keep an old PC with Windows ME on it, just so that he can play one of his favourite games, should he ever want to.

Mr. Green's opinion is that PCs should be for office (documents, spreadsheets, etc.), internet, email and media playback; in his own words, "if you want to play games, buy a games console - they're designed for that specific purpose".

Another colleage (Mr. Black) holds a diametrically opposing viewpoint - he believes that PCs are the only worthwhile format for playing games on.  One of his main arguments (ironically) is that console gaming is too costly - new consoles are always increasing in price, with games for them often priced

[Andrew]

Consoles are expensive, but so are dedicated gaming PC.

Sure you can buy a PS3 for say $399. But that only comes with 1 controller, maybe one game. Then new games cost $60 before taxes (so PC games are not much different, but I think their prices drop faster than consoles).

You most likely need a computer anyways, so instead of buying a crappy computer, and console, you would buy a decent tower for $1000 that will last 3 years. Can be used to do everything a console can do (play games), play movies/music etc.

The biggest advantage of consoles is local multiplayer. Having friends over to play a game is much easier this way. Although it is possible to have a computer and setup some controllers and play a game. Played rock band last weekend with 15 people, had 4 people playing at a time. Was fun, and would be difficult/impossible to do on PC.

Anyone who says computer games can only be played on monitors and not TV is incorrect. For $100 you can get a card/remote and use tv as monitor to watch movies and play games. Not difficult to hook computer up to flatscreens nowadays.

For just a single person (you) to play games, then PC definitely wins. But if you want to invite someone over and play multiplayer together you need a console.

I don't have a console, but everyone I know does. In fact, I don't know many people who plays games on computers, maybe one person, whereas everyone else plays on xbox or PS3. Consoles are easier for tech illiterate people. Plug stuff in, put in disc and play game.

[Dragoon Knight]

I would disagree to an extent that PC's are better for solo gaming - yes, locally, that is all they can be used for (aside from some keyboard-sharing games), but a good deal of console games are single player only.  Take the RPG format - whether it's Western or JRPGs, most of them are a one player affair, and a sizeable amount of them have only ever been released on consoles.  Indeed, a lot of them are being re-released on consoles as opposed to PCs.

This brings the whole topic of emulation up as well, where you can simply download a program for your PC that will allow you to load ROMs of your console games of choice, or even read them directly from your DVD or BD (Blu-ray Disc) drive.  But assuming we're only going for orthodox routes to games, I would say that consoles and PCs are on even footing for the single-player experience.

Consequently, I totally agree with the local multiplayer advantage that consoles have... but then again, you can't really beat a good LAN party. :P

[Dante]

I'm opposed to the whole philosophy of consoles. You want to play X game but your console only plays Y games? Sorry, you have to buy X console to play X games. You want your console upgraded, downgraded, modded? Nope, sorry, you can't do that. Looking for longevity and versitility? Sorry, your unmoddable console will be obsolete in a few years and don't even think about trying to do your taxes on it.

Also, is there any such thing as a successful console RTS?

The one area in which consoles shine is their specificity. Because games are made to a specific system, they can be tailored to take advantage of that system and exploit it in the most efficient (read: enjoyable) way. Graphics can be high-end because everyone has the same hardware, there's no need to consider low-end specs or different approaches as there is with PCs.

I believe, though, that the flexibility of the PC is more valuable than the benefits brought about by the console's narrow focus; benefits that can be equalled with a sufficiently high-end system anyway.

So there Dav- er, Mr Green.  :P

[Dragoon Knight]

You bring up some good points - cost and exclusivity are often issues when it comes to consoles.  But let's look at things from a broader perspective.

- Most games now come out on every platform, whether it be PC, Xbox 360, PS3, etc.  You even get some coming out on the PSP and DS, meaning that handheld consoles aren't left out.  Indeed, some games come out for consoles that will never come out for the PC; this can be seen as a point of favour or not, depending on your viewpoint.

- Consoles do tend to have a relatively short lifespan, but it's about equal (if not slightly longer than) the lifespan of a top end graphics card; in 4 or 5 years, a console will be outdated and in need of replacement, but so will a graphics card.  In PC terms, your motherboard / processor may also be out of date (new version of PCI-Express or processor too slow) - in the end, you might end up paying just the same, if not more, to keep your PC up to date with games.

- There has never been a decent console RTS, except for Theme Hospital, and possibly Command & Conquer: Red Alert, both on the original PlayStation.  Halo Wars for the 360 may be an exception, since it is the only RTS designed solely with a console in mind, but since I haven't played it, I can't testify either way.

You're right about the speciality - the DS and the Wii are shining examples of this.  Motion sensing and touch-screen capability bring new dimensions to a game that raw processing and graphics power might not.  However, the Wii seems to be suffering from strictly "gimmicky" games as of late, a trend that I hope will reverse itself.

With regards to the hardware being uniform, this is definitely an advantage - it's similar to what Andrew said, in that you never have to worry about your console being unable to handle a game.  But I would say that your protestations of consoles costing more may be less of a problem than you perceive. :)

[veK]

I just give you some points of view from me:

- Consoles are in fact very cheap. Even a brandnew PS3 didn't cost as much as my videocard for the pc (and I mean the videocard alone).

- Console games are more expensive than PC Games. I bought all my games after waiting for a while though and got them rather cheap then.

- Consoles are much better for hanging out in the living room. Also it's nicer if you have friends around and have Co-Op or Versus games.

- Consoles have great games only available on consoles (especially Hack & Slash and Beat Em Up Games) or games which can be played much better with a controller.

- A PS3 can be put to very good use. I use it 80% of the time for playing music, movies or tv shows. Only 20% it's on I actually play games.

- PCs give you the opportunity to play games with better graphics.

- PCs are perfect if you play RTS, RPG and FPS games. FPS with a controller are a pain in the ass.

- PCs are faster/easier for some stuff like installing patches, contacting friends with skype or teamspeak.

- PCs are still popular for gaming because it's easier to play pirated copies.

- PC games often aren't very well programmed. the programming for consoles must be much better because the hardware is the same for everybody and developers can't just say "upgrade your system" if the game has massive slowdowns.

I have been a gamer on both sides my entire life, starting with Commodore64 and Gameboy. I usually had both a gaming system and a console. I have played a lot of FPS in single and multiplayer and played competitive counterstrike in leagues and tournaments. At the start of this year I sold my gaming PC after buying a PS3. Why? Because I did lose interest in FPS games and even long awaited titles like Crysis, COD4 and FarCry2 were only good for one weekend session. I had an expensive PC and I didn't need all this highend hardware for anything else except for playing a game every now and then. So 95% of the time my PC was running I did use it for something else like office work, internet, email, poker, photoshop, music...

Now I have a PC which is supersmall (Shuttle), didn't cost me a lot of money, is still pretty fast CPU-wise and doesn't even need 50% of the power I needed for the gaming system.

Still I wouldn't say that you use only consoles for gaming. It really depends on what you are playing I guess and most of the time you can use both platforms at the same time because some game titles are still different (not available for console or the other way around) and there's a huge difference if you take a look at the genres.

[Dragoon Knight]

Interesting points, veK.  To highlight a few and respond:

- Games consoles as multimedia platforms is something that's only happened really strongly in the current generation.  Sure, your PS2 / Xbox could play DVDs and connect to the net in a limited fashion, but with Xbox LIVE and PSN, it's an entirely different world.  Movie rentals, demo downloads, music purchasing, TV streaming, entire games being released solely via online content; one could say that consoles are providing a much richer service now, becoming almost PCs in themselves.

- PCs generally have better graphics, but only if you have top-end hardware.  A graphics card would be essential, but so would a decent dual or quad-core processor and a hefty amount of RAM.  Then there's the monitor to consider - 1280x1024 is no longer cutting it for some, with widescreen and higher resolutions required to get the maximum graphical response from games.

- In relation to your "games for consoles are well programmed" point, you bring up a topic that consoles aren't so good at addressing - hardware issues.  Everyone who owns an Xbox 360 has had some experience with the Red Ring of Death, and many an owner has had to ship their brick back to Microsoft to get it fixed.  This sort of thing is very unlikely to occur in a PC, as all of the hardware is modular, in that if one piece breaks, it can usually be replaced (i.e. not throwing the baby out with the bathwater) and done in the comfort of your own home (assuming you know a little about PCs).

As some people may have gauged, I don't take sides in this - gaming is good, regardless of the platform.  Each side has arguments for and against, but nearly all of them can be countered by looking at it from a different perspective.

Take, for instance, the issue of console gamepads / controllers (or even some handheld consoles) being unweildy - the original Xbox controller was a monster, and Microsoft were quick to release an "S" version.  The PlayStation Analog controller was (and still is, I believe) touted as being the most ergonomical and easy to use, whereas the GameBoy Advance SP gave me terrible finger and palm cramps when played extensively.

There are points in favour and points against - there are those that insist that controllers give split-second responses, with much less complexity and all actions focused on the same buttons for every game.  There are others who believe the keyboard offers a much wider array of possible actions, all laid out in an innately recognisable manner, with fine control possible via the mouse, all without the need to neglect most of the use of your hands (up to 5 digits on your left, up to four on your right, vs. a console controller's thumbs and forefingers).

Anyone else care to share their views on what's been discussed?  Bring up some new points, perhaps? :)

[Gruntlord6]

i had previously only been able to play console games so i was very exited when i was opened up to pc gaming, as such i can say the following points,

consoles are cheaper and last longer then a gaming pc, you never worry about an xbox 360 game being too new for your console.

however consoles (xbox most of all) are locked down with ludacris amounts of security, to the tune of twice the security of a bank account. this makes modding games difficult but rewarding.

pcs have obscene amounts of drm, to the point that legal purchasers are treated like criminals while actual pirates easily strip away this protection. this makes rampant piracy an issue , and thus amplifies the problem as developers try more radical and ineffective methods.

pcs see more inovation, because they are not locked to a specfic generation of hardware, as such games become more immersive vibrant and awe inspiring.

in conclusion both have incredible strengths and flaws that will most likley always remain unless the two technologies merge.

[Gruntlord6]

i am posting this from a ps3 so please excuse my need to double post.

consoles are preconfigured, as such games always work without any difficulty.

it is for these reasons and those posted above, that i own a xbox, wii, xbox 360 and maintain a gaming pc. it is not easy, but it is worth it.

[Dragoon Knight]

Had almost forgotten about this thread - had to re-read it to familiarise myself with the points already made. :)

- The point of cost has been presented from both sides; it could conceivably be argued that consoles are cheaper than an entire Gaming PC (which is certainly true).  Yet Andrew touched on a point which is often used in retaliation to this: the cost of console games themselves.  It's no secret that games for the PS3 or XBOX 360 (the latter, especially) are regularly

[veK]

I always like pc games as well als consoles (playstation 1-3 for the most part)...

There's a real good argument for consoles, especially PS3: exclusive titles that only appear on the ps3. And usually they are awesome. Here are some examples:

- God Of War Series

- Ratchet & Clank Series

- Uncharted 1+2

- Infamous

- Metal Gear Solid Series (as far as I know there will some MGS game for the 360 soon as well?)

[Gruntlord6]

the new falcon xbox 360 design is really low fail rate.

games cost more on consoles because of licensing fees.

there is tray and play technology in halo 2 vista

the original ps3 was backwords compatible, but cost hundreds of dollars extra to produce.

[Rene]

Personally, I am a PC gamer, but I can't really give you more points than mentioned in this thread. But keep in mind when PC gaming 'dies' as has been predicted many times ::), so will the console market:

The main driving force behind hardware development is PC gaming. Consoles can't do this job, because they're always based on the current high-end hardware. PS3's Cell processor might be something entirely different than a regular CPU, but it's design and construction would have been impossible without the regular PC technology improving. So if PC gaming dies, hardware development would be much slower. Maybe interesting to keep in mind ;)

[Gruntlord6]

Personally, I am a PC gamer, but I can't really give you more points than mentioned in this thread. But keep in mind when PC gaming 'dies' as has been predicted many times ::), so will the console market:

The main driving force behind hardware development is PC gaming. Consoles can't do this job, because they're always based on the current high-end hardware. PS3's Cell processor might be something entirely different than a regular CPU, but it's design and construction would have been impossible without the regular PC technology improving. So if PC gaming dies, hardware development would be much slower. Maybe interesting to keep in mind ;)

hard ware is entirely different, but dev on computer hardware will never die, since thiers still graphic designers.

plus i think the two will merge rather then die.