Do you guys play your console at all by yourself? The only times I touch my 360 is when my friends come over, and we do a lil halo/cod4. But other than that, I think console gaming is so boring, especially because of communication barriers. Halo gets sooo boring after a while, it's not even fun. When I see people with major rank I'm like how can you play that long...
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
to those that have both PC and Console
- Thread starter SouLXIV
- Start date
WhyYouLoveMe
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 6,513
I like cookies.
Pie is better.
I have a kick ass PC,Xbox 360 and a PS3..
With that said,I primarily game on my PC(sig rig),a couple of sports games or games that arent coming to PC(Bourne,Dark Sector) on my 360 and MSG4 on my PS3..Ive got all bases covered..If a game is multi platform,I go with the PC version as it is MY platform of choice..But now,my PS3 will serve proudly as a HTPC in a box..
With that said,I primarily game on my PC(sig rig),a couple of sports games or games that arent coming to PC(Bourne,Dark Sector) on my 360 and MSG4 on my PS3..Ive got all bases covered..If a game is multi platform,I go with the PC version as it is MY platform of choice..But now,my PS3 will serve proudly as a HTPC in a box..
Watch it there buddy..Voltron ROCKS...Unless youre talking about the Voltron with 30 pieces.That one does suck...The 5 lion Voltron rules!1
wildfire99
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 720
Sure. I don't have an issue with the consoles themselves, but with the "console gameplay". Most of the PC titles I pick up I can sit in front of and play for hours straight. They emphasize exploration, character development or accessorizing, problem solving, and often allow for 'out of the box' thinking in being able to find ways to solve problems that aren't the official ones.
By contrast, most console games I can't play for more than 30 minutes at a time. The console games typically promote linear 'experiential' gameplay, where it's closer to the point of watching an interactive movie than it is playing a game. You typically can't go anywhere that isn't an immediate quest/mission destination, you can't break gameplay, and if there is any character building at all it's usually achievements or mere unlocking of new weapons/abilities, instead of choosing how to level your character.
What I often forget is how I used to play games when I was a kid. I liked anything repetative and straight-forward, most of the time. Kids in general really want that kind of structured experience. That's why you see games like COD4 and Halo where you've got almost a rail-like shooter experience being dominant, and why (in terms of numbers) the dollars are rushing over to the console side. It's not necessarily a dumbing down of gaming, but an issue of appealing to the lowest common denominator (the <16 year old crowd), which outnumbers most of us in spending dollars significantly. They also have far more time than we do, and an attention span that is far more focused given the proper stimulation.
At the moment my rental is Folklore for the PS3. It's such a beautiful game, it had a skilled art department. But in terms of gameplay, it's almost shockingly bad. You can do nothing except go from point A to point B, which takes roughly 5 minutes per "level". You then save, and get a new mission, which takes another 5 minutes. It's almost a crime to call this a "game". It would be like calling hitting a wiffleball with a cardboard tube in your living room the same thing as playing baseball. Yet these are the games that are on shelves for $60 a pop, and are supposed to be the epitome of "next-gen" gaming.
I think the hoopla about Fallout 3 right now is a prime example of the trends in gaming. Look at how it appears to have been structured to the aforementioned console crowd, with howls of concern from the PC gaming crowd. Similarly, your experiences (and mine) with COD/Halo, versus say Stalker (well, the 'accident' that was the first one). One set of games I play through once, and that was it. It's like a tasty but over-sugared cake. The second is something that you want to come back to over and over, you want to load up the mods and try it different ways, and it at least delivers something each time. The COD/Halo cakes were $60, and they didn't even provide the experience the $30 or less cake did, but guess which one sold record-breaking units?
So, communications barriers aside, it's merely an issue of different targets and different markets. Meanwhile, the PC sphere has changed as well, emphasizing RTS games and FP shooters extensively.
I bought Morrowind for $10, and I'm shocked at how bad it is in terms of user experience. It's like someone made a game engine and didn't know what to do with it, so they threw together a couple of quests and maps and called it a game. But probably if I was 10, I'd think it was amazing. I just know better now. But my demographic increasingly does not pay the money the younger crowd does, so my opinion does not count to groups like EA and Microsoft Game Studios. It isn't a clear cut case of consoles killing braincells, but of companies looking for revenue streams instead of giving customers a great experience, regardless of platform.
I saw this kind of dumbing down of gaming coming for a long time now, and I predicted it would cause the collapse of the game industry for the second time. I'm not so sure of that now (given that the numbers seem to go up the more quality is sacrificed), but I do know that gaming in general continues to, for me at least, get less and less interesting.
It's not just gaming, I could make the same arguments about anything. Such as the monthly sales of McDonalds versus real food, and the weird inverse relationship of McD's wholesale costs versus the cost of ingredients at the supermarket. Or the real value of buying from Whole Foods (Whole Paycheck) versus smart buying at a regular grocer.
I think the real question is whether things around us truly get more disappointing as time progresses, or if we merely become more accustomed to expecting greatness.
Wait, I forgot to phrase my response in the form of a meme. "LOL yah teh consoles are sux. I pwn noobs with mouse/kb, pc gaming woot!"
(BTW: The 30 piece voltron was amazing. Even the cartoon was better, IMO. But true, nothing beats the sheer awesomeness of the original die-cast lion set. Too bad black lion's wings always got broken off since they were plastic. I wish they'd make the original megatron transformer again, the one that actually turned into a freaking handgun.)
By contrast, most console games I can't play for more than 30 minutes at a time. The console games typically promote linear 'experiential' gameplay, where it's closer to the point of watching an interactive movie than it is playing a game. You typically can't go anywhere that isn't an immediate quest/mission destination, you can't break gameplay, and if there is any character building at all it's usually achievements or mere unlocking of new weapons/abilities, instead of choosing how to level your character.
What I often forget is how I used to play games when I was a kid. I liked anything repetative and straight-forward, most of the time. Kids in general really want that kind of structured experience. That's why you see games like COD4 and Halo where you've got almost a rail-like shooter experience being dominant, and why (in terms of numbers) the dollars are rushing over to the console side. It's not necessarily a dumbing down of gaming, but an issue of appealing to the lowest common denominator (the <16 year old crowd), which outnumbers most of us in spending dollars significantly. They also have far more time than we do, and an attention span that is far more focused given the proper stimulation.
At the moment my rental is Folklore for the PS3. It's such a beautiful game, it had a skilled art department. But in terms of gameplay, it's almost shockingly bad. You can do nothing except go from point A to point B, which takes roughly 5 minutes per "level". You then save, and get a new mission, which takes another 5 minutes. It's almost a crime to call this a "game". It would be like calling hitting a wiffleball with a cardboard tube in your living room the same thing as playing baseball. Yet these are the games that are on shelves for $60 a pop, and are supposed to be the epitome of "next-gen" gaming.
I think the hoopla about Fallout 3 right now is a prime example of the trends in gaming. Look at how it appears to have been structured to the aforementioned console crowd, with howls of concern from the PC gaming crowd. Similarly, your experiences (and mine) with COD/Halo, versus say Stalker (well, the 'accident' that was the first one). One set of games I play through once, and that was it. It's like a tasty but over-sugared cake. The second is something that you want to come back to over and over, you want to load up the mods and try it different ways, and it at least delivers something each time. The COD/Halo cakes were $60, and they didn't even provide the experience the $30 or less cake did, but guess which one sold record-breaking units?
So, communications barriers aside, it's merely an issue of different targets and different markets. Meanwhile, the PC sphere has changed as well, emphasizing RTS games and FP shooters extensively.
I bought Morrowind for $10, and I'm shocked at how bad it is in terms of user experience. It's like someone made a game engine and didn't know what to do with it, so they threw together a couple of quests and maps and called it a game. But probably if I was 10, I'd think it was amazing. I just know better now. But my demographic increasingly does not pay the money the younger crowd does, so my opinion does not count to groups like EA and Microsoft Game Studios. It isn't a clear cut case of consoles killing braincells, but of companies looking for revenue streams instead of giving customers a great experience, regardless of platform.
I saw this kind of dumbing down of gaming coming for a long time now, and I predicted it would cause the collapse of the game industry for the second time. I'm not so sure of that now (given that the numbers seem to go up the more quality is sacrificed), but I do know that gaming in general continues to, for me at least, get less and less interesting.
It's not just gaming, I could make the same arguments about anything. Such as the monthly sales of McDonalds versus real food, and the weird inverse relationship of McD's wholesale costs versus the cost of ingredients at the supermarket. Or the real value of buying from Whole Foods (Whole Paycheck) versus smart buying at a regular grocer.
I think the real question is whether things around us truly get more disappointing as time progresses, or if we merely become more accustomed to expecting greatness.
Wait, I forgot to phrase my response in the form of a meme. "LOL yah teh consoles are sux. I pwn noobs with mouse/kb, pc gaming woot!"
(BTW: The 30 piece voltron was amazing. Even the cartoon was better, IMO. But true, nothing beats the sheer awesomeness of the original die-cast lion set. Too bad black lion's wings always got broken off since they were plastic. I wish they'd make the original megatron transformer again, the one that actually turned into a freaking handgun.)
Asian Dub Foundation
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 7,940
i play most games by myself anyways
Zepher
[H]ipster Replacement
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2001
- Messages
- 21,006
I play racing games on the 360 and FPS's on the PC.
Ok, besides all of the OTHER contrived and inaccurate parts of your response there - I just have to say that if you thought Morrowind was just thrown together, you missed like 95% of the game. I'm not even talking about expansions or user generated content either. Just the game itself had reams of books worth of text written JUST for the in-game books. There were multiple factions and guilds that all had their own storyline to follow. There was soo much put into morrowind, I never thought I'd ever hear anyone say it was thrown together.
That being said, I still found it to be entirely boring - and had to download a mod just to get rid of those stupid dragon/vulture things from attacking me every 5 seconds... but there was a SHITLOAD of content there.
As for the rest of your post, you seem to think that the less than 16 yr old demographic spends more money on games. Since a recent demographic study showed that not only is the AVERAGE age of video game players 18, but those under 18 make up less than 35% of the end user base. That being said, I highly doubt that kids 16 and under make and spend more money on video games than the 18-24 year old market base (aka young, single, and with a large disposable income)
It's true that we see a lot of uninspired gameplay mechanics used, however I don't think it's because the game developers are pandering to a younger market. Instead, consider they may not have the dev time to re-invent the FPS/RTS/RPG and so they have to go with what is tried and true. The revolutionary, inspired, and outstanding games are not ever going to be common, there will be a few that stand at the head of the pack - and the rest will be the baseline.
There are some awesome console games, and some incredible PC games - there are also TONS of good games for both as well, they just don't shine like the rest.
I have a PC and a 360. Lately, I've been playing the PC a lot more, but that'll probably go in phases. It depends on tastes, but I've played the following by myself on the 360:
- Halo 3 campaign
- Beautiful Katamari
- Guitar Hero 2/3
- Dance Dance Revolution Universe 2
- Eternal Sonata
- a whole host of XBL arcade games (including Puzzle Quest)
On the PC, my interests lately have included:
- Crysis
- BioShock
- Oblivion
- Halo 3 campaign
- Beautiful Katamari
- Guitar Hero 2/3
- Dance Dance Revolution Universe 2
- Eternal Sonata
- a whole host of XBL arcade games (including Puzzle Quest)
On the PC, my interests lately have included:
- Crysis
- BioShock
- Oblivion
TheCommander
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2003
- Messages
- 2,999
PC by myself. Consoles with a friend. Sports games and fighting games namely on consoles while most of the other genres on the PC.
illuminate
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2007
- Messages
- 1,895
I PC game, and ive got a Wii. I rarely touch the Wii. ive got about 5 games for it .. and i prefer Wii bowling over them all ( high score 254 ). I play the Wii with my friends, but i still prefer PC gaming. Ive played 360, ps2, and other systems, and over those, i still prefer the PC.
meanmodda[H]
Gawd
- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Messages
- 526
I concur.
I've got PC, Xbox 360, PS3, Wii, PSP.
I do most of my gaming on the PC, have the xbox 360 but don't play it, rock band on ps3, party games on wii for when friends come over, psp for on the move.
Console gaming really is moving towards more of the interactive movie type. All depends on what kind of games and gaming experience you are looking for though.
I do most of my gaming on the PC, have the xbox 360 but don't play it, rock band on ps3, party games on wii for when friends come over, psp for on the move.
Console gaming really is moving towards more of the interactive movie type. All depends on what kind of games and gaming experience you are looking for though.
D
Deleted member 189430
Guest
Hi all! I've been browsing the forums for quite awhile now but just registered because I wanted to throw in my 2 cents on this topic.
I am 34 yrs old and I own a ps2, ps3, psp, wii, ds, 360, and PC. I am not here to say that PC's rule consoles suck, or consoles rule and PC's suck. I like playing games, period. It just goes with whatever mood I'm in. Though I have to say that more than 75% of my gaming time is on the PC.
That said, I game by myself, unless I'm playing with my kids. Just broke away from the World of Warcrack, so I'm going back to finish and in some cases play for the first time, my games.
To finish, I usually play sports games, and a few exclusives, on the consoles and everything else on the PC.
later
I am 34 yrs old and I own a ps2, ps3, psp, wii, ds, 360, and PC. I am not here to say that PC's rule consoles suck, or consoles rule and PC's suck. I like playing games, period. It just goes with whatever mood I'm in. Though I have to say that more than 75% of my gaming time is on the PC.
That said, I game by myself, unless I'm playing with my kids. Just broke away from the World of Warcrack, so I'm going back to finish and in some cases play for the first time, my games.
To finish, I usually play sports games, and a few exclusives, on the consoles and everything else on the PC.
later
Sixthsense
I Suck Fat Ones
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2001
- Messages
- 3,262
PiP, interesting, never thought of that one.
fortunately, I'm able to run the 360 sound to my speaker bar, and use my headphones from my pc...
I buy the consoles but game 98% on my PC. I should stop wasting my money on them. I just don't "get into the game" on consoles as I do on PC. My teen had friends over (he normally pc games more than I do) and they fired up the Wii instead of the PS3 and played Smash Brothers and had a hell of a good time. So much for these high end consoles.