Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2017 0:04:58 GMT
+Better graphics. +Better sound. +Larger variety of games. +Upgradable. +Modable. +Not a worthless hunk of shit when the next gen comes out. +Not a waste of money.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Oct 4, 2017 12:11:59 GMT
when it comes to shooters there is only one reason you need to say a PC is better than a console and that is... mouse.
a mouse is simply far easier/more natural to track stuff on screen then using a analog stick as you can get your crosshairs on target much more quickly with a mouse. it's a significant difference to say the least as it goes from enjoying a game to not enjoying it.
i guess on the flip side... for general navigation of your character in a shooter a consoles controller is easier on your hands but since aiming is paramount it's a small sacrifice for the precision aim the mouse offers.
p.s. in terms of graphics... the computer has generally always been ahead of consoles over the long run. but with sound i would not really claim much there either way as once you get to a certain point it's all pretty much the same.
|
|
|
Post by binaryvegeta on Oct 4, 2017 23:50:10 GMT
I still have a PS3 and it's not a worthless hunk of shit.. I still play games on it I would like to get a PC or a Xbone for Cuphead. Consoles can be easier for some gamers! Plug it in and play games.
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Oct 5, 2017 20:33:25 GMT
Consoles are MASSIVELY better than PCs.
This is an UNDISPUTED FACT.
Consoles have:
+Bette games. +Better graphics. +Better sound. +Larger variety of games. +Relevance. +Quality. +Not a worthless hunk of shit when the next gen comes out. +Not a waste of money.
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Oct 24, 2017 0:53:04 GMT
Consoles should be easier. Sadly they're becoming inexpensive PCs. It's why I prefer The Switch. All you need to do is pop the cartridge in and you can play the game. Maybe that's not true for all games because the new NBA game is going to be huge. But that's a reason console gaming was better than PC. It was easier.
And I don't want to buy a new PC unless I have to. I bought Civilization VI and it won't work on my laptop. I really don't feel like spending the money on a new computer just to play games.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 19:42:28 GMT
Seriously? We're still doing this?
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Oct 26, 2017 22:42:08 GMT
I don't see a big gap in anything from watching people play on pcs versus my PS4. You can tell me it's there and I'm sure there's some pixel number or whatnot to back it up...but I don't see it. If I saw it to the point I could justify the more expensive PC price tag...I'd be all over it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2017 3:35:15 GMT
Although I'm considering getting an Xbox One X for the 4K Blu-ray playback, and so I'll have something to play Red Redemption 2 when it comes out, due to it not coming out on PC. I know I shouldn't be supporting such greedy behavior but it's the sequel to one of the greatest games of all time. Plus if I'm going to buy a 4K Blu-ray player anyway, I may as well spend a bit more and get an Xbox One X.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 3, 2017 20:38:12 GMT
Consoles are MASSIVELY better than PCs. This is an UNDISPUTED FACT. Consoles have: +Bette games. +Better graphics. +Better sound. +Larger variety of games. +Relevance. +Quality. +Not a worthless hunk of shit when the next gen comes out. +Not a waste of money. It's pretty safe for me to say 'Better Graphics' sides with the PC i can't see anyone disputing that in the long term as the PC always wins out (especially years ago before HDTV's came along as the gap has closed because of this) especially given PC hardware changes often where as with consoles you typically only see one change about once every 5 years+. so that fact alone (with the hardware stuff) guarantee's the PC have higher graphics potential. the better sound comment... is a non-issue as once sound quality reaches a certain point you won't be able to tell the difference anyways. it's like people who claim they can hear a difference between a AUDIO CD and a AAC/MP3 file as when they do a double blind test (i.e. ABX test) they will generally experience that they can't tell the difference like they thought they could as i am willing to bet most people overestimate their abilities here as with a ABX test it proves whether someone can hear the difference or not between the high quality source (i.e. lossless) and a MP3/AAC (i.e. lossy). i am willing to bet most people will find 128kbps encoded by the Apple AAC encoder (which can be encoded with Foobar2000 (which is what i use) when configured) to be quality even though some people can notice the difference but even then it's not much as that's a pretty safe bit rate for quality/file size. NOTE: ABX tests can be run using Foobar2000 on the PC as all you need is a lossless source file (i.e. FLAC (or rip your own CD's to FLAC etc)) and then encode your own AAC/MP3 file at whatever bit rates you want to test. basically this site is pretty much the standard if you want to learn about this sort of stuff... hydrogenaud.io/ ; they use actual data to backup sound quality claims instead of people giving random opinion which almost everyone will overestimate their abilities as it's actually funny seeing some comments on random websites where people actually claim, and are dead serious about it, that they can hear a difference between a WAV file and a FLAC file but that's impossible simply because the actual audio stream are 100% the same between the two files. basically FLAC just shrinks the WAV file to roughly 40-60% of it's original size but when played back it re-creates the exact sound (like it's identical to the actual store bought audio CD assuming it was made from that in the first place) as there is no loss of sound quality whatsoever which is why it's called 'lossless' audio. that's why i tend to keep all of my music CD's in FLAC format so if i ever need to re-rip to a different lossy format or a different bit rate i can do it from the lossless source which is the proper way to do it. it only takes about 1min tops (unless your PC's CPU is fairly old) to encode a entire audio CD from FLAC to AAC or MP3 with Foobar2000. but anyways, even once next gen comes out... PC's are not worthless junk as they are still the best way to access the internet. using internet on tablet/cell phone (and the like) is basically a watered down experience. but with that said... purely in terms of gaming i realize PC's can get expensive but gaming on PC's tends to be overall cheaper than it used to be years ago where in a few years time your PC got outdated. but lately, say for roughly this current decade, you don't need a monster PC for it to last years. hell, my CPU is from Feb 2011 (i had it since May 2012) and it's still respectable considering it's age although i did upgrade my video card in July as before that i flat out could not play modern games on it but then again that video card i used to have was from 2010 so it was basically 7 years or so old. but one area a console does have a clear advantage is things are simpler/more reliable in that you buy a game it just works since the hardware is the same across the board basically where as with PC's, since they have a lot of different hardware configurations, it's more likely to have issues. p.s. so it's basically easy for me to say your 'consoles are massively better than PC's and is a undisputed fact' is simply not true as each have their ups and downs. but it all boils down to what kind of games you play as i feel the PC's main strength is shooter games because of mouse+keyboard. but if using a analog stick does not bother you on shooters and you don't care about the PC's graphics etc then in a case like that a console would likely be hands down better for that type of person.
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Nov 4, 2017 0:22:13 GMT
Consoles are MASSIVELY better than PCs. This is an UNDISPUTED FACT. Consoles have: +Bette games. +Better graphics. +Better sound. +Larger variety of games. +Relevance. +Quality. +Not a worthless hunk of shit when the next gen comes out. +Not a waste of money. It's pretty safe for me to say 'Better Graphics' sides with the PC i can't see anyone disputing that in the long term as the PC always wins out (especially years ago before HDTV's came along as the gap has closed because of this) especially given PC hardware changes often where as with consoles you typically only see one change about once every 5 years+. so that fact alone (with the hardware stuff) guarantee's the PC have higher graphics potential. the better sound comment... is a non-issue as once sound quality reaches a certain point you won't be able to tell the difference anyways. it's like people who claim they can hear a difference between a AUDIO CD and a AAC/MP3 file as when they do a double blind test (i.e. ABX test) they will generally experience that they can't tell the difference like they thought they could as i am willing to bet most people overestimate their abilities here as with a ABX test it proves whether someone can hear the difference or not between the high quality source (i.e. lossless) and a MP3/AAC (i.e. lossy). i am willing to bet most people will find 128kbps encoded by the Apple AAC encoder (which can be encoded with Foobar2000 (which is what i use) when configured) to be quality even though some people can notice the difference but even then it's not much as that's a pretty safe bit rate for quality/file size. NOTE: ABX tests can be run using Foobar2000 on the PC as all you need is a lossless source file (i.e. FLAC (or rip your own CD's to FLAC etc)) and then encode your own AAC/MP3 file at whatever bit rates you want to test. basically this site is pretty much the standard if you want to learn about this sort of stuff... hydrogenaud.io/ ; they use actual data to backup sound quality claims instead of people giving random opinion which almost everyone will overestimate their abilities as it's actually funny seeing some comments on random websites where people actually claim, and are dead serious about it, that they can hear a difference between a WAV file and a FLAC file but that's impossible simply because the actual audio stream are 100% the same between the two files. basically FLAC just shrinks the WAV file to roughly 40-60% of it's original size but when played back it re-creates the exact sound (like it's identical to the actual store bought audio CD assuming it was made from that in the first place) as there is no loss of sound quality whatsoever which is why it's called 'lossless' audio. that's why i tend to keep all of my music CD's in FLAC format so if i ever need to re-rip to a different lossy format or a different bit rate i can do it from the lossless source which is the proper way to do it. it only takes about 1min tops (unless your PC's CPU is fairly old) to encode a entire audio CD from FLAC to AAC or MP3 with Foobar2000. but anyways, even once next gen comes out... PC's are not worthless junk as they are still the best way to access the internet. using internet on tablet/cell phone (and the like) is basically a watered down experience. but with that said... purely in terms of gaming i realize PC's can get expensive but gaming on PC's tends to be overall cheaper than it used to be years ago where in a few years time your PC got outdated. but lately, say for roughly this current decade, you don't need a monster PC for it to last years. hell, my CPU is from Feb 2011 (i had it since May 2012) and it's still respectable considering it's age although i did upgrade my video card in July as before that i flat out could not play modern games on it but then again that video card i used to have was from 2010 so it was basically 7 years or so old. but one area a console does have a clear advantage is things are simpler/more reliable in that you buy a game it just works since the hardware is the same across the board basically where as with PC's, since they have a lot of different hardware configurations, it's more likely to have issues. p.s. so it's basically easy for me to say your 'consoles are massively better than PC's and is a undisputed fact' is simply not true as each have their ups and downs. but it all boils down to what kind of games you play as i feel the PC's main strength is shooter games because of mouse+keyboard. but if using a analog stick does not bother you on shooters and you don't care about the PC's graphics etc then in a case like that a console would likely be hands down better for that type of person. PCs rarely win on the graphics department. Consoles are clearly better than PCs.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 4, 2017 10:07:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Nov 5, 2017 2:12:21 GMT
Yes, you must be trolling. Consoles destroy PCs.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 5, 2017 3:17:06 GMT
Harry Skywalker Not on shooter based games for sure as that's the PC's main advantage is aiming more quickly/precisely with the mouse. it feels more natural (i.e. easier/less effort) as analog stick is a chore to use in comparison when tracking stuff on screen. like for me it's a large enough gap to where it goes from enjoying a shooter game with a mouse to not enjoying it on a analog stick. the last time i really enjoyed a shooter on a console was basically the N64 with GoldenEye in 1997-1998 and that was before the modern standards we have had since basically PS2/XBox generation in 2000-2001 as by that point in time i was too used to a mouse and could not change back with Counter-Strike etc which i first played that in 2000 (it's been out since 1999 though). p.s. either way, your obviously heavily biased in consoles favor not to acknowledge even a single advantage the PC has over a console as you act like a console blows away PC's across the board which is not true. sure, consoles do have some advantages but it's not significant enough to make PC's irrelevant. but i would imagine the typical gamer prefers consoles if i had to guess because of their simplicity as you can simply buy a game and play it where as with PC's you generally need to know stuff in order to buy the proper hardware etc. but one area a PC has another advantage is game mods etc. i don't really mess with game mods much myself but some people seem to really like that.
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Nov 5, 2017 3:19:02 GMT
Harry Skywalker Not on shooter based games for sure as that's the PC's main advantage is aiming more quickly/precisely with the mouse. it feels more natural (i.e. easier/less effort) as analog stick is a chore to use in comparison when tracking stuff on screen. like for me it's a large enough gap to where it goes from enjoying a shooter game with a mouse to not enjoying it on a analog stick. the last time i really enjoyed a shooter on a console was basically the N64 with GoldenEye in 1997-1998 and that was before the modern standards we have had since basically XBox/PS1 generation in 2000-2001 as by that point in time i was too used to a mouse and could not change back with Counter-Strike etc which i first played that in 2000 (it's been out since 1999 though). p.s. either way, your obviously heavily biased in consoles favor not to acknowledge even a single advantage the PC has over a console as you act like a console blows away PC's across the board which is not true. sure, consoles do have some advantages but it's not significant enough to make PC's irrelevant. but i would imagine the typical gamer prefers consoles if i had to guess because of their simplicity as you can simply buy a game and play it where as with PC's you generally need to know stuff in order to buy the proper hardware etc. but one area a PC has another advantage is game mods etc. i don't really mess with game mods much myself but some people seem to really like that. Consoles are massively superior to PCs. FPS games are way better on consoles. Playing with keyboard and mouse is awful. We are in 2017, not in the 90s anymore.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 5, 2017 3:34:33 GMT
Harry SkywalkerYou clearly don't understand things with a comment like that. mouse+keyboard vs analog stick still remains the same regardless of the decade since both of those have been standardized for a long time now (basically the 1990's with mouse+keyboard and pretty much 2000-2001 with consoles). p.s. i doubt i would think much of GoldenEye now as it was good in it's day but since it's even worse than modern console shooter standards, since it does not use the standard dual analog stick, i am sure that's something ill praise because of nostalgia only and would not like today.
|
|
|
Post by MooseNugget on Nov 5, 2017 3:51:42 GMT
The truth is if you want the best gaming experience you'll buy yourself a gaming computer.
If you're on a budget getting a console will be the way you'll want to go. Honestly with the move toward 4K gaming these consoles are just becoming inexpensive PCs. The strongest argument consoles have anymore are the games themselves... And that's not a factor for Xbox since now Microsoft is putting all it's games on both Xbox and PC.
Personally I'm not interested in using my laptop for gaming. I got a few games on here that I can't get on a console. And like I said I got a game and it wouldn't work on this computer. That was really annoying.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Nov 5, 2017 5:23:44 GMT
No consoles rule and you guys who disagree are all poop.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Nov 5, 2017 5:24:20 GMT
MooseNuggetYeah, you definitely want to avoid laptops for gaming as you need a desktop as they are much better for gaming as they are more powerful and can be upgraded etc. basically where laptops really suck is they tend to have really underpowered GPU's and that tends to be a show stopper especially if your game is fairly new. Ill definitely avoid Microsoft games on PC simply because of this issue i had (which never happened to me before with the typical ways games are installed on the PC)... 1)install Forza 7 demo to another drive outside of your main boot drive. NOTE: i installed to my Z drive which is a 5TB hard drive. my main boot drive, that Windows 10 is on, is a 250GB SSD. 2)at this point everything is fine and you can play the game. 3)format main drive and reinstall windows. at this point you can't get all of your free space back on the 5TB drive you installed Forza 7 demo to. only way i could get my free space back was to get all of my files off of the 5TB drive i installed Forza 7 demo to and then format it and then transfer the files back. after that issue i am done using any of that Microsoft BS as that simply should never happen. normally you can simply delete the installation directory and your free space is freed up but not with this. how i noticed this was when i selected all of the files on my 5TB drive and checked the properties and compared that size to the used space when you right click the 5TB drive and select properties as there was something in the ball park of 7GB of space difference when those should be pretty much the same. but after i temporarily transferred the files on the 5TB to my other hard drives, then formatted the 5TB, and transferred the files back to the 5TB hard drive... when i checked those two things again they played out as i expected them to as the used space of the files were basically the same as the used space when checking the drive itself (and no, there was no hidden files etc as i already checked this). hell, the folders Forza 7 demo created you could not even delete. even when i tried booting up a live linux disc and removing the directory, while that removed the directory, it never freed up the storage space that it should have. basically you can't even view the files of the Forza 7 demo when it's installed or even see how much storage space they take up etc. that's just taking stuff too far on Microsoft's part. p.s. there was no errors on the drive either as it works 100%. it was definitely something tied to the Forza 7 demo not freeing up the space it should have. i am not even sure if MS is aware of this issue or not. but that wasted several hours of my time to fix it having to transfer files around between hard drives.
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Nov 6, 2017 2:06:34 GMT
Harry Skywalker You clearly don't understand things with a comment like that. mouse+keyboard vs analog stick still remains the same regardless of the decade since both of those have been standardized for a long time now (basically the 1990's with mouse+keyboard and pretty much 2000-2001 with consoles). p.s. i doubt i would think much of GoldenEye now as it was good in it's day but since it's even worse than modern console shooter standards, since it does not use the standard dual analog stick, i am sure that's something ill praise because of nostalgia only and would not like today. It's obvious you are the one who doesn't understand things. Gamepads for consoles were poor for FPS games during the 90s, however since many years ago gamepads for consoles are awesome and massively superior to keyboard and mouse.
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Nov 6, 2017 2:07:46 GMT
The truth is if you want the best gaming experience you'll buy yourself a gaming computer. If you're on a budget getting a console will be the way you'll want to go. Honestly with the move toward 4K gaming these consoles are just becoming inexpensive PCs. The strongest argument consoles have anymore are the games themselves... And that's not a factor for Xbox since now Microsoft is putting all it's games on both Xbox and PC. Personally I'm not interested in using my laptop for gaming. I got a few games on here that I can't get on a console. And like I said I got a game and it wouldn't work on this computer. That was really annoying. False. The truth is if you want the best gaming experience you'll buy yourself a console for videogames. Nobody cares about PC gaming. PC gaming is almost irrelevant compared to Console gaming.
|
|