PC vs Consoles

12 12 2009

Ok, hold on tight for this post. This is going to be a Foxx Thoughts first… a rebuttal multi-author post between Foxx and me. I will start with my opinion on the topic, we will have a slight separation and then Foxx will comment… So… here we go… drink your Kool-Aid and follow me…

My stance on this topic is P C… I am a PC Gamer… I have no shame in this… I’m a FPS and RPG junky… everything from Quake to Eve Online… AA to WoW… I had consoles in my early gaming years… and I enjoyed them, but nothing works like a Gaming PC. I hear arguments all the time about how costly PC Gaming is… but I look at it like this:

Decent Gaming PC: $600

New game for said PC: $30 – $60

New game comes out, requires better graphics card: $80

Console: $200 – $500

New game: $45+

Upgradable: Not usually (and in some cases, punishable if you try)

New game released that requires better console: $300+

The console turns into a never ending cycle of buying a new console every few years just to keep up with the times… However, I can pretty much get any game released on anyone of the console platforms (mainstream games, I’m not talkin about franchise games, and honestly, I could care less about Mario or Sonic…lol) and load it on the PC… My control options in game are far superior to any hand held control for a console as are my options for communication while in game. I can also mod my PC in anyway I see fit without fear of having my gaming connection turned off because a company did not agree with me having Linux or a better hard drive…

Foxx’s turn. I’ll use Sony’s Playstation system for this. On average, your looking at about 4-6 years before the new console is out and affordable. so that’s 4-6 years of guarantee that your game is gonna work. where as about 6 months on a computer you find yourself needing more RAM, then a better video card and before you know it, your looking at the fact that your processor speed doesn’t match up to the new game you wanna play and your computer is only 2 years old. You’re looking at about $150 there and it’s only been 2 years (that’s half the current price of the Playstation 3 for those of you unaware). So by the time you have spent 4 years worth of upgrades, you’re at the cost of buying a Playstation 3. Now for games, I give that pc games tend to be cheaper. Playstation 3 games sit at about $60 for the good titles, but for $60 I’m guaranteed that I’m going to go home and pop this disc into my ps3 and I’m gonna play.. lets say GTA4. Now this guy may go and buy GTA4 for the PC for about $40 just to take it home and realize that even though his specs match the requirements, there’s an issue where the game doesn’t work so well with the hardware he has. Next example I’m going to use is Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. This game has a PC version, but its missing everything that makes as PC version worth buying (meaning a direct port from the console version). So now your sitting at Wal-Mart and you see COD:MW2 for $50 on the PC shelf and the same game on the Xbox 360 Shelf (this statement being made assuming you have a pc that will run this cutting edge game and a 360) for $60 I’ll take the 360 each time because I know for sure that the game is going to work like its supposed to each and every time. Finally upgrading the system. Not necessarily needed. Games are still being made for the Playstation 2 and that was what… 9 years ago. This offers the exact same game play with just a hindered graphics card. If graphics are not your thing, your really saving this way, ps2 costs $100 new and games for it run about $40 new. Match that up to a $600 PC needing constant upgrades and its no contest.

Ok, first off…. Using GTA4 is a bad example… I don’t know what RockStar was thinking, but they screwed up with the PC mod for that game… just not a big enough market to require Shader3. And in all reality COD: MW2 isn’t greatly system intensive. Base Suggestions for this game are 2.4gb Dual Core Processor, 1gb ram and Geforce 7800 or better (and the bastard requires shader3 which is standard on most Geforce Cards). We also need to keep in mind that we are talking about gamers; we cannot compare the average person’s computer to that of some one that has the PC for the soul purpose of GAMING (solitaire is not gaming). Yes, games are still being made for the PS2, but honestly what true, current to times modern gamer is going to pick up those games over the modern games such as COD: MW2 and the like…  (From everything I have heard cod: mw2 sucks no matter what system you play it on). Let’s say I’m at the local Electronics Shop… I see a game that I really like… the console its on, I don’t happen to have… but I have my PS3 and a PC… Would it be logical for me to buy that new console instead of buying the game for the PC? No, it wouldn’t, what’s the point in having 4 consoles and a PC when most everything you can play on those consoles can be played on the PC?

Anyway, so back on topic, I’m gonna finalize out my opinion with this list of attributes that seal the deal for me.

Cost Effective

Unlimited Modification

Unsurpassable Control System

Extreme Multitask System

In some cases, portability

In most cases the actual game can be mod’ed for single person play and even multi person play. And by modding I mean editing levels, maps, vehicles, player skins… etc…

The ONLY downfall I think is the fact that once you install a PC game in most cases, that game belongs to you indefinitely, and you cannot remove the license… damn pirating laws.

I’ll start off with your modding of the game and roll back to COD:MW2. In this game, there’s no modding, you can’t edit maps, you can change player skins, hell, you cant even host a server. Game makers are moving away from PC versions of games and resorting to simply porting a console version instead of making a version for the PC. Your cost affective argument flies out the window when you talk about making a real gaming machine. You’re not going to find one that’s a true gamer machine for $600. The MW2 base suggestions, that’s a $600 computer, but that’s just to run the game, not for optimal performance. Not much I can say on controls except, hook a USB mouse and keyboard up to your PS3/360. Notebooks aside, a PS3 or 360 are more portable then a PC. As for games itself, every big game that hasn’t been a FPS or system exclusive, has been released for the PS2. all the games with years (Madden, NCAA Sports Games, Fifa, NBA, so on, so on) come out on the PS2, Band Hero, DJ Hero, TMNT: Smash Up, and Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 just to name a few. If you really want to multitask on the PS3, install Linux on it; it’s natively supported (Yeah I was reaching with this one). The big winner… USED GAMES. You can pick up games at used prices and trade games in for credit towards other game purchases. Not an easy option for PC games.

GG Dred. I Enjoyed this. In the end I myself think that Consoles offer more reliability while PC’s offer more versatility.


X-Box Live 1 million served

11 11 2009

xbox-live-og-contentMicrosoft recently announced that it will be cutting access to their online servers to up to 1,000,000 x-box live subscribers. These subscribers have been chosen to lose their service based on the fact that they modified their x-box 360 in some manner. Most of these modifications were to the DVD-ROM drive to allow “backed up” (at least that’s what the modifier will tell you, majority of the time its pirated games) to be played on the 360 console. The other modifications were mainly modifications to the hard drives because people either wanted/needed more storage space then Microsoft currently supplies, or, They were not willing to pay what Microsoft is attempting to charge (on average $1.00/Gb compared to $.10/Gb for standard hard drives).


As far as I feel about it, I paid for this system (I don’t own a 360, but if I did) so I should be able to modify it to be able to do what I want. If the storage is insufficient, or I want to run a different operating system on the said hardware, I should be able to do that. I understand the pirating issue and hate that they feel this is the only way they can really crack down on pirating, but I do feel that at $60 a game, I should be able to take measurements to preserve my disc. If Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo would replace my disc when it becomes unreadable, I would be more then happy to have every system banned (maybe even remotely deactivated) that modified the ROM drive.  What’s killing me are the comments of people to these reports. Majority of them are saying that this is just a ploy by Microsoft to get people out shopping again to replace their banned X-box during holiday season sales or that if the games didn’t cost so much, they wouldn’t have to pirate. My favorite one of all was this one person (he used a guest account so I cant directly credit him, and I do not recall which site I was reading this on so I cant point you their either, but) claimed that he pirated games because he wanted to test them to make sure he didn’t buy a game he didn’t like. I believe that’s why there’s this whole rental system out there. You pay way less then you would for the game yet you still have a chance to play it all the way through. These claims are outrageous at best, this is just simply (and I can’t believe I’m siding with Microsoft but…) Microsoft doing their job by enforcing their rules.


The main point brought about with the modification of the consoles is that they do not want anyone to have an unfair advantage. I never quite understood this from Microsoft’s perspective because they are also in the PC world, where in, lets say World of Warcraft, the person running a pc with 4 gigabytes of RAM and a 3 gigabyte dual core processor with a 10 Mbps connection is always going to win the fight against an equally talented opponent with 2 gigabytes of RAM and a 2 gigabyte single core processor with a 6Mbps connection. The second person can be just as talented with his character or, even better, but because he did not spend as much money as his opponent on hardware for his “console” that person is at a disadvantage. Until I hear Microsoft complain on this side of the field, I just simply can not accept their argument on fair play.

Microsoft Pulls out on McFarlane Special

27 10 2009

windows-7-logoGet this, Microsoft, who was sponsoring a Seth McFarlane and Alex Borstein special, pulled out of the deal due to the potentially offensive choice of comedy. Who didn’t see this coming? The original idea was for Microsoft to pay for the special to be commercial free, but to have various subtle hints at Windows 7, Microsoft’s latest operating system which was released this past week. After hearing jokes about the deaf, the Holocaust, and incest, (has anyone at Redmond ever watched an episode of Family Guy?) Microsoft decided that the show “was not a fit with the Windows brand”.  Who did not question this from the word go? With this you have 2 options; Microsoft partnering up with one of the most offensive duos in animated comedy, or them to bail out. With the way Microsoft has been concerned with their public image lately, I was completely shocked to see this partnership.  Fox still plans to air the special on November 8th with a yet-to-be named sponsor taking over for Microsoft