PC vs. Consoles

+
A....no....! I was talking about Oblivion's graphics! Read it carefully! ;)And to make myself understood about why I'm talking so much about Oblivion.is because someone used it as an example in the "consoles war"!Saying that, "look,Oblivion is on consoles and this makes them good,cause Oblivion is the 2nd best game at graphics"And then you came and said that Oblivion has the best graphics after Crysis,which is madness! Well no,it's not! So please read my post once more from top to botom!
 
FreddyKruger said:
And then you came and said that Oblivion has the best graphics after Crysis,which is madness!
In your opinion, which you are very welcome to have.But I still don't see the relevance to PC vs Console. Let's try and make it definitely relevant: Oblivion, COD4 and Bioshock are all critically acclaimed games, they don't look significantly worse on the console, and in fact have sold many times more copies on console compared to the PC. Despite that, they are all great games on the PC as well, however the sales margin is a concern, since it is becoming clear that the role of the PC is best suited to less demanding titles like World of Warcraft, or better still, casual gaming, which sells an order of magnitude more than even console games.
 
kalniel said:
In your opinion, which you are very welcome to have..
Is not my opinion is the whole world's!I'm asking you once more:have you read it? Because I showed you there a game that has better graphics than Oblivion and he's name isnt Crysis! ;)And it's on console too!
 
FreddyKruger said:
I'm asking you once more:have you read it? Because I showed you there a game that has better graphics than Oblivion and he's name isnt Crysis! ;)And it's on console too!
So your point regarding PC vs console would be what exactly? That consoles have games that look good too? If so, good, I agree with your point, even if not your example :)
 
kalniel said:
So your point regarding PC vs console would be what exactly? That consoles have games that look good too? If so, good, I agree with your point, even if not your example :)
Well... of course consoles have games that look good an example is Heavenly Sword,but this is not the point!The point is that there are games with a much better graphic than Oblivion and one of those games is Dark Messiah of Might and Magic! ;)
 
FreddyKruger said:
Well... of course consoles have games that look good an example is Heavenly Sword,but this is not the point!The point is that there are games with a much better graphic than Oblivion
What has that got to do with PC vs console then? I'm lost. Dark Messiah is also on consoles.
 
kalniel said:
What has that got to do with PC vs console then? I'm lost. Dark Messiah is also on consoles.
You're driving me nuts! :dead: :wall:I'm not talking about PC and consoles,I dont care about them! what I'm trying to say is that Oblivion hasnt got the best graphics! That's what I want to say!And I'm talking to you because you said that Oblivion has the best graphics!Do you understand me now?P.S. This is the Off topic so I can talk about off topic things! ;)
 
Oblivion had some pretty damn good graphics in it's time, and they are still pretty good in retrospect to games nowadays. I'd personally say that The Witcher has been able to take the Aurora Engine and rebuild the rendering engine into something that puts Crysis and Oblivion and most games to the test, and in most cases beat them, but that's besides the point.When it comes to comparing Oblivion and Crysis, however, it's like measuring apples and oranges. One focuses on being in cities, dungeons, in red tinged world dimensions and exotic locations in Shivering Isles. The other is pretty much our own world and you interact with different levels in outside areas like Jungles. One is a gigantic world that was built from the ground up to be alive and vibrant, with characters following daily lives throughout the world. The other is individual levels that were polished before going to the next level. Quality-wise? There are areas built in Oblivion that don't exist in Crysis to begin to compare and thus one can't say whether they would be done better in Oblivion or Crysis. You could assume that Cryengine 2 could do it better, but then you're just assuming. It may very well be amazing at outdoor areas, and pale in comparison to indoor dungeons. And in my opinion, Oblivion's graphics are still top-notch to this day when turned to high. It does the job for what the game entailed superbly, and that's what counts. Sure there are engines that are better, but do we really wanna to get to a point where games look like they were built in a movie studio with real actors, or in real locations? We play games to remind ourselves that we are playing a fictional game and to get away from reality, no?
 
regarding console gamers vs PC gamers - rumor and stereotype:This is all MY OPINION. I do not present any of this as fact, just my views of over 30 years of gaming on both PC and console formats. I believe that most of what people supposedly think concerning the difference between PC and console gamers is mostly old stereotypes. Pc=Adult, console = kiddies, right? You guys here, of all people, should know what utter garbage stereotypes are. PC games are also only played by fat anti-social men living in their parents basements, didn't you know? So I, a not-quite-middle-aged happily married female gamer who also enjoys snowboarding certainly doesnt exist in this world....People continue to make assumptions about what 'this gamer' or 'that gamer' should be, or who the gaming consumers really are. I don't know who is doing these surverys and coming up with these statisitcs, but they need a reality check and maybe a drug test. People who believe all that crap would argue that I'm the exception and not the rule, so that every time a 'discrepency' comes up its tossed out. However, when you start adding us all up, you'll see that we really arent 'discrenpencies' after all, but part of the pattern. Some of my best buds in World of Warcraft are nearly old enough to be my mother. Those 'older friends of mine enjoy Oblivion, Mass Effect, Silent Hill, Drakan, Ico, Guitar Hero, Diablo, Baldurs Gate....i've also had older coworkers (male and female) who played a variety of games. The point of all this little rant is that if youre pigeonholing people because of what they play on, then youre certainly no better than the people who think you all are pimply losers still living in your parents basements who have not yet managed a date with anyone of either gender.PC vs console:Anyway, I believe there are some games that are far more enjoyable on one than the other. I can't see myself playing Resident Evil or MGS on a PC. Nor can I see myself playing Warcraft or Hellgate on a console. Some games work for me on either: right now its freezing cold outside and I'm very tempted to curl up on the couch with my husband, a controller and Oblivion rather than something on my PC. Yes I have played Oblivion on all 3 systems: 360, PC and PS3. While all the mods and things for PC do make it overall the best Oblivion experience, the other 2 certainly arent a bad experience. Indeed, my first playthrough of Oblivion was on the 360. Why? Well, because the PC I had at the time would have had a LOT of trouble handling it even at its lowest settings. And although I know this will no doubt get some sneers, I personally find it nice to be able to pop a disc in and get it to play WITHOUT having to wrestle with it first. I've owned "Black and White" since the week of its release, and have not yet owned a PC able to play the blasted thing. Why? Not a clue. Everyone from Tech support for the PC to game support said it should....but I have never yet gotten it to play on the 3 desktops and 1 laptop I've had during that time. Each was slightly more powerful than the one before, and with different graphics cards - but all certainly within in the bounds given by the game. I digress, but thats one reason that some people prefer consoles - system compatibility is not an issue. The main drawbacks of consoles is the lack to upgrade, to tweak, to mod...a game on a console is pretty well set in stone. You can't upgrade your console with a better graphics card, or add more memory. I'll grant that consoles are much more limited in scope, and gameplay features (though this is slowly improving). Frankly, you can usually do more with a PC game than its equivalent on a console. Evo on the SNES will always be exactly how it is on the SNES. And that brings me to another point: once you have 'cutting edge technology' on your PC - sometimes its harder to play OLD games than it is new ones! I grew up with videogames: I was a pre atari gamer - I remember the Odyssey. I have wonderful memories of Quest for the Rings, Space Invaders, Omega Race, Pick Axe Pete, Parsec, hunt the Wumpus, The Count, Zork, Temple of Apshai, Impossible Mission, Jet Set Willy, Sierra and LucasArts adventure titles (yes thats a mishmash of early console and PC titles)....how many people still have floppy drives on their PCs? While things like DOSBOX and MAME and various emulators can be a godsend...they dont always work. Plus, if youre like me you have very serious guilt issues over downloading games that you'd be happy to buy if only they were avaible for todays PCs. Believe me, I nearly cried for joy when I discovered the Kings Quest/Leisure suit larry/Space quest compliations that were re-released by Sierra! I don't have nearly so much trouble with old console games - the consoles can be found in working order in most pawnshops, used game stores, ebay...finding a working 5 1/4 floppy is a lot more difficult. :(So, while I own a PC now that can handle nearly anything up to Crysis (no harm there I figure since Crysis really doesnt look terribly interesting to me anyway), I still see pros and cons to both consoles and PCs. I think both are viable options for ANY gamer (if not just any game): any one who poo-poos a console or a PC is shorting themselves as a gamer. I don't think theres any harm in saying 'I dont like Halo' or 'I dont like enough games on the PS3 to warrant buying one'. But to refuse to try a game or admit that you might like a game because of its platform is just shortsighted.Regarding the graphics quality of Oblivion vs Crysis vs whatever:Wha? Maybe those people silly enough to think that good graphics = good game care about this, but I dont. Eye candy is well and good, but when it isnt backed up with a good story, or solid gameplay...well, put all the frosting you want on a turd, and while it may look better than it did, it's still a turd. Now, as to to the topic that brought me over here originally: The Witcher on a Console. Good idea or bad idea?Well, while arguments can be made that developing for multiple formats can cause a less than perfect product; that obviously isn't the case here. The Witcher was designed for PC first and foremost....obviously there is no going back and 'watering it down'. The product is done. So my question is: whats the harm in a PS3/360 port now? I honestly can only think of 2 responses to this. 1) That Witcher would no longer be PC exclusive (are PC gamers really just elitist jerks?) or 2) That what console gamers would get would be a bad product (sorry guys, but I have MUCH more faith in the developers than that. If the format really just didn't work, I dont think they'd do it, rather than selling a crappy product). So hypothetically, lets say Witcher gets a console port. Console gamers LOVE it. So now The Witcher 2 is a possibility on both console and PC. Do you REALLY think that the devs would really turn an EIDOS or EA and just start slapping things down, regardless of quality? This is a brutal question, and it's meant to be. But think about it. When you play the Witcher - what do you feel? I don't get the impression this was done as something guarenteed to be huge, like FEAR or Half Life or Oblivion. I get the impression that the people who worked on this game did it because they LIKED their source material, and they wanted to do something different with that. They could have made an Oblivion clone, or a Halo clone, or a one of a zillion other series. Instead they did something new, and enjoyed making it I think.I took a risk buying The Witcher, because I didnt know anything about it but thought it looked interesting. Now I want to find the original stories, and learn more about this world. Now with that being said, I will trust the developers to do what they feel is right for their series. If they feel they can do justice to it on a console, I am more than in favor of bringing the Witcher to a wider audience. As for the ratings thing - i honestly dont see how that would make much of a difference. The ratings board in the states supposedly uses the same criteria when rating PC and console games, so why would it matter...?
 
gamefreak1972 said:
regarding console gamers vs PC gamers - rumor and stereotype:This is all MY OPINION. I do not present any of this as fact, just my views of over 30 years of gaming on both PC and console formats. I believe that most of what people supposedly think concerning the difference between PC and console gamers is mostly old stereotypes. Pc=Adult, console = kiddies, right? You guys here, of all people, should know what utter garbage stereotypes are. PC games are also only played by fat anti-social men living in their parents basements, didn't you know? So I, a not-quite-middle-aged happily married female gamer who also enjoys snowboarding certainly doesnt exist in this world....People continue to make assumptions about what 'this gamer' or 'that gamer' should be, or who the gaming consumers really are. I don't know who is doing these surverys and coming up with these statisitcs, but they need a reality check and maybe a drug test. People who believe all that crap would argue that I'm the exception and not the rule, so that every time a 'discrepency' comes up its tossed out.
WOW,this was a long post! I had to read it twice! No offense but if you reply then please put some more spacing between paragraphs cuz on such a long post it's very hard to read without any. ;)Still I'm happy to see someone with such a strong point of view!But I dont know why I'm having this feeling that you're being frustated or that you're having an inferiority complex and thus you manifest yourself with,lets say "hate"!(but I'll discuss this later)Well...I dont even know where to start from... ???I think I'll start with the beginning! You say that this is your opinion and that you do not present it as fact! Right? But then you add:just my views of over 30 years of gaming on both PC and console formats. It's like you're saying this: "hey noobs I was playing video games before you were even born so dont you dare argue with me cause I know more than you'll ever do!"Well...I for one dont think that experience=wisdom or that by having over 30 years of gaming you have a better understanding of games,unlike others who are playing games for only 10 or even 3 years!-this is a stereotype!Anyway PC=adults consoles=kiddies? hm...I believe you didnt quite get it! No one said something like this!The thing is that consoles are more action oriented and they are destined for more casual gamers whereas PC is the ideal place for "hardcore"(and a hardcore gamer isnt one who played games for over 30 years) gamers!It isnt about the platforms on which the games are played it's about the games themself!(p.s. here we do not talk about the Wii,because that console is for kiddies,and we are not talking about older consoles either!we are talking about the PS3/PS2 and the Xbox 360/Xbox) So your point is useless! And your belief that "most of what people supposedly think concerning the difference between PC and console gamers is mostly old stereotypes" is wrong!There are games for PC and there are games for consoles!They are called "exclusive games"!Some games as you've stated are meant to be played on PC because of the unique enviroment that a PC can offer,while other games are meant for consoles because of its unique experience!I have both! PC and console! So you cant call me a stereotypical man!I bought my console for the exclusive games like Uncharted,Heavenly Sword,God of War 3 ,GT5,MGS4 and so on!Not for multiplatform games!what would be the point to do that? For example I bought Assassins Creed for PC although this isnt the best example because it was designed for consoles so you can play it on both PC and consoles without a lack of quality! But I prefer it on the PC because of the Dx 10 feature although I can play it on a HDMI TV...But when you're talking about an RPG,well... this is a whole different story!An RPG is a more complex game(destined for an "elite" category of gamers) in which the action revolves around the story! That's why is hard to combine these 2 elements without an overall lack of quality!You just cant play an RPG in front of your TV with the gamepad! It just dosent seems right!Dante Aligerri said that the middle age of man is 35 so judging after this and after your username I believe we could call you a middle aged gamer ;DWell I believe you're trying to make this some sort of "gamer types" discussion: People continue to make assumptions about what 'this gamer' or 'that gamer' should be, or who the gaming consumers really are. I don't know who is doing these surverys and coming up with these statisitcs, but they need a reality check and maybe a drug test. People who believe all that crap would argue that I'm the exception and not the rule and because of this I said that you give me the impression of a frustrated person! No one said anything about this!
gamefreak1972 said:
you all are pimply losers still living in your parents basements.
Whats wrong with living in your parents basement? :D Although I prefer the attic ;D
I don't know who is doing these surverys and coming up with these statisitcs, but they need a reality check and maybe a drug test
Let me ask you something,who are you to say something like this? Those people are professionals!
gamefreak1972 said:
The main drawbacks of consoles is the lack to upgrade, to tweak, to mod...a game on a console is pretty well set in stone. You can't upgrade your console with a better graphics card, or add more memory. I'll grant that consoles are much more limited in scope, and gameplay features (though this is slowly improving). Frankly, you can usually do more with a PC game than its equivalent on a console.
What you're saying here is true but in the near future it wont be like this anymore! you can already apply patches to the PS3 and you can change it's HHD!
gamefreak1972 said:
I was a pre atari gamer - I remember the Odyssey. I have wonderful memories of Quest for the Rings, Space Invaders, Omega Race, Pick Axe Pete, Parsec, hunt the Wumpus, The Count, Zork, Temple of Apshai, Impossible Mission, Jet Set Willy, Sierra and LucasArts adventure titles (yes thats a mishmash of early console and PC titles)....how many people still have floppy drives on their PCs?
I do have a floppy drive on my PC! :D
gamefreak1972 said:
Plus, if youre like me you have very serious guilt issues over downloading games that you'd be happy to buy if only they were avaible for todays PCs.
I know what you're saying,I never once in my life downloaded a game! It's a nice feeling to go at a shop and buy a game!
gamefreak1972 said:
So, while I own a PC now that can handle nearly anything up to Crysis (no harm there I figure since Crysis really doesnt look terribly interesting to me anyway), I still see pros and cons to both consoles and PCs. I think both are viable options for ANY gamer (if not just any game): any one who poo-poos a console or a PC is shorting themselves as a gamer. I don't think theres any harm in saying 'I dont like Halo' or 'I dont like enough games on the PS3 to warrant buying one'. But to refuse to try a game or admit that you might like a game because of its platform is just shortsighted.
Its not about this,mainly it's all about the quality of the game! If a game is good no one cares on what platform it is!I mean a game like Oblivion compared with a game like Arx Fatalis will always be a"bad" game!No matter on what platform you're playing it!
gamefreak1972 said:
Regarding the graphics quality of Oblivion vs Crysis vs whatever:Wha? Maybe those people silly enough to think that good graphics = good game care about this, but I dont. Eye candy is well and good, but when it isnt backed up with a good story, or solid gameplay...
about the Oblivion vs Crysis" good game =good graphics,good story,good gameplay,good atmosfere\=Oblivion!Sorry to say this but Oblivion is not one of the great games that made history,games like Gothic,the Ultima series and last but not least Arx Fatalis which is one of the best RPGs of all time!Oblivion is like Harry Potter compared with The Lord of the Rings! It has no chance!
gamefreak1972 said:
So my question is: whats the harm in a PS3/360 port now? I honestly can only think of 2 responses to this. 1) That Witcher would no longer be PC exclusive (are PC gamers really just elitist jerks?)
PC gamers are not elitist jerks,they are just an elite!(not all of them but still...)
 
Pretty soon, in the not so distant future, there really isn't going to be any major difference between a PC and a Console. The only difference will be whether you attach the unit to a monitor, or to a TV. Microsoft already is blurring the lines with the XBox 360 and PCs with their XNA Game Studio that allows developers to build a game and port it to XBox 360 pretty easily. If C# can become as fast and efficient as C++, games will also be much quicker to design as well.The question is whether the world really wants the lines being blurred between PCs and Consoles. If there is the ability to upgrade with consoles, you lose the fact that the games don't need to deal with configurations, and then everyone will begin to have issues about whether their Playstation 5 has a certain graphics card or whatnot. Just take a look at the issues with The Witcher, which mainly is due to the infinite configurations PCs can have. Now put that on a console where, arguably, the majority of users have quite a bit less patience. A console user expects a game to work perfectly on a console. A PC user expects the same, but we gotta be honest that it's just not probable.
 
[size=12pt]Sorry about the spacing issues, I didnt realize at the time how bad it was. :(Whoa Freddy, I think you missed my point in a couple spots, because in most cases I'm actually agreeing with you - sometimes I forget that tone doesnt come across well on the boards. :)Frustrated? Hateful? That really wasnt what I had in mind at all really, although I will admit sometimes to being frustrated by fanboyism and sexism in the videogame industry. Because, to my mind, it really should be about the games themselves, not about whether the 360 is better than the PS3 or whatever, nor should a persons ..ah...'personal plumbing' make a differnce in what games you enjoy, or even if you should play them at all. Although I will admit, sometimes people's misconception about female gamers can make some damn funny stories...But anyway, 30 years of gaming is where I get my OPINION from. My experience of gaming as a woman over 30 years of time does NOT mean I have all the answers. Experience doesnt = wisdom, I'll be the first to admit. :) But, its the basis that I use to form my opinions rather than working in a gamestop or in the industry. Thats the entire point of that statement: to explain where my ideas have come from and what they're based on - my history and that I am not new to gaming. Btw, nor do I claim to be a 'hardcore' gamer. People's definition of 'hardcore' varies from person to person, and it doesnt matter whether that includes me or not. I am 'a gamer' - add whatever adjectives to that you like. Inferior? Once upon a time, back when was still in public school and I really was afraid I was the only female gamer in the world. More than anything, I don't want other women to feel the way I did which is probably why I'm so outspoken about it now.Pc=Adults, consoles = kids: that is a common attitude among some people, including non-gamers (those that dont believe all videogames are played by kids anyway). I wasn't directly quoting anyone here, however this sort of mentality was alluded to in the original thread that this topic came from: should the Witcher get a console port? One of the reasons given for 'no' was that ratings/censorship on the consoles would be more likely to be harsher (implying that the ratings are more strict there on consoles - implying that its more of a child thing again. Keep in mind I personally DONT agree with this line of thought, but it does seem to be a common perception). However, I find it funny that you added "It isnt about the platforms on which the games are played it's about the games themself!(p.s. here we do not talk about the Wii,because that console is for kiddies,and we are not talking about older consoles either!we are talking about the PS3/PS2 and the Xbox 360/Xbox)" to this. Wii is just for kiddies? I really must disagree: I think I've established I'm far too old to be a 'kiddie' yet I enjoy quite a few games on the Wii. And WHY on earth would you exclude the older consoles? Some of the best games ever created are 'old'. And when you say 'older consoles' does that mean youre tossing out platforms like the Commodore, the Apple 2, the Sinclair? Or just the NES/Atari/SNES/Genesis type stuff? If it really is just all about the games, why exclude anything? (which is the basis for my whole arguement - there are good games on EVERY system, EVERY platform, so why limit yourself?)Also, while granted I was reading and skimming pretty fast on the original topic, I dont recall it ever being mentioned that only 'modern' platforms were to be considered. If it had, I doubt I would have posted because like I said - why limit yourself with something like videogames? Might as well make the arguement that only music from 2000-2005 (or some other random small block of time) is worth listening to or talking about.And yes, your comment about "Some games as you've stated are meant to be played on PC because of the unique enviroment that a PC can offer,while other games are meant for consoles because of its unique experience!" - yes, I agreed with you there too - remember when I said that I could not imagine Warcraft or Hellgate on a console, etc? Thats where I was agreeing with you :) Those 'professionals' you mentioned....who are they? You think that perhaps they are people with PhDs in something like stats perhaps? While that would make sense, every time I see a report on 'who is playing games' and 'who is playing WHICH games' - I laugh. Because usually those things are pretty far off. Professionals? Maybe some are....but do you think the people who reported that Mass Effect was a sex game were experts of any sort? If youve even spent an hour with the game, you already know the answer to that. I use that because its the most recent example of butchered reporting that comes to mind. There are people who firmly believe that only teenage boys play games (and as such there should be NO M rated games like Witcher because only 14 year olds will play it), yet here we all are, grown men and women. Hence the reference to needing a drug test - that wasnt entirely serious, but when people are that far off, you have to wonder why. Well, *I* have to wonder anyway. Who am I to question? Well, I'm a gamer who knows other gamers who know other gamers who know other gamers.....so when those professionals say 'women dont play games' or even 'most women dont play games' and I know 30 personally who do (friends, coworkers, etc - not 30 women I met through 'gaming gals' or some such thing - I'm talking CASUAL connections here), and I'm aware that they each know more women who do....well, it at least makes me wonder where these stats come from. LOL and once again I catch us in agreement :) Good games are good games, regardless of platform. :) And as for Oblivion being Harry Potter compared to LotR, well, to continue the comparison - I enjoyed Harry Potter for what it was. Did I enjoy LotR more? Oh yes. :) But does that make Harry Potter bad? Not at all, IMO. I enjoyed it for what it was, not for what it wasn't. :) Oblivion may not be the greatest game ever created, but I've spent many a happy hour on it. Even if it ISNT another Ultima, or Gothic, or Arx Fatalis I still enjoyed it, and isnt that the whole idea?Btw, the elitist jerk comment was not serious either, it was more placed there to show that there was no harm in an console 'after port' of the Witcher, should the devs choose to do it.psI'm jealous - I need to rebuild another PC with a floppy drive in...but they are getting harder and harder to find in good working order. :( I've got an older PC in the spare bedroom that I'm hoping will soon be able to play some of the good ol Sierra/lucasarts/infocom stuff without so many hitches....but in the meantime...I'm jealous..
 
You know, For many, many years (I'm kinda old) I've been "all about PC's"!"PC over CONSOLES any day, RIGHT?"But now I'm not so sure.I have become so increasingly annoyed with the unstability of PC games over the years, that the fun of itall has almost been completely sucked dry.I DO NOT have the time nor the patience I once had to continiously fiddle and tweak my computer (usually to NO avail)just to get a single freaking game to run on it.These new consoles out now producd practically the same graphics enhanced gameplay, but without all the fuss of uprades, driver installations, Operating System bugs, insufficient graphics cards, and all the other time consuming crap that seems to go along with PC Gaming.An EXCELLENT example of this is THE WITCHER>I mean, COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!The problems with this game is just completely Ridiculous. (Yeah, and I know that people say "oh, it's just your system configurations") But...we ALL know thats CRAP!It's a 60 dollar video game for Crying out loud. Anyway, that's MY rant.
 
And yet it works great on three different laptops I have, none of which are gaming grade by a long shot. Nor have I tweaked or done anything. Runs superb. XP and Vista included. I don't understand why computers that can benchmark 3-4 times my systems have such issues in The Witcher. If it was a game problem, I would have an issue on all three of my laptops. And in the defense of systems running quad core processors, 8800GT and GTS, etc., I have seen it run flawless at high quality on 2 of my friend's systems. No crashes, or at most the typical CTD after 6-7 hours of play.If you don't research a computer purchase and the specs involved, and make an educated decision based on how advanced games are, and you don't maintain a computer (which takes maybe an hour or so a week, especially if you use automated maintenance tools), then you get what you get. If you don't know how to maintain a computer, that's fine. Not everyone is computer savvy, and that's why companies like iolo created System Mechanic. You set it up, let it do it's stuff automated, and your system runs at peak. I know computers, and I still run it.Yes PCs are more advanced, but we're talking a good 3-4 year window here of valid equipment that can reasonably run The Witcher fine. Assuming you follow the countless posts on here, and CDPR's list of recommended equipment, it will work. If you want to play games, you buy a good system now and it will arguably handle 3-4 years of games. Which, coincidentally, is about the lifespan of a good Console. But blaming a game, any game, that doesn't have a recognizable bug that every single person gets? It's not the developer's fault. Either the user's system (which many times is out of the user's hand, i.e. the piece of crap formerly known as Vista), or it's just a bad day.
 
They effectively say:pC gaming is plagued by piracy problems.It would be impossible to put something like Crysis on a console.Why are PC fanboys are meant to eat the above?
 
No! They say that they are looking to use CryEngine 2 engine on consoles!They should eat the fact that CryEngine 2 will not be a PC exclusive anymore!
 
Top Bottom