neowin.net

I just had had a thought after reading a few posts by PC gamers wondering about the PC release of GTA: San Andreas.

It seems to happen fairly often when a great game comes out for a console (GTA, MGS2, Final Fantasy, Silent Hill, etc. etc.). PC Gamers say, "When's it coming out for PC?" "Why doesn't 'so-and-so' make a PC version?" and other such comments that show a distress over a game not being released for Windows.

A question to you PC gamers. Why is it you'll spend hundreds upon hundreds for PC upgrades so you can play the newest PC game, but refuse to drop so much as $120 for a preowned console to play the newest PS2, GCN or XBOX game? You'll buy new memory and a new video card so you can play Half-Life 2 the second it comes out, but at the same time, you complain that not enough of the great console games are released for PC.

Just today I saw a post about someone saying how he's just going to have to wait a year for the PC version of GTA: San Andreas. If he wants to play it so much, is $120 or even less for a preowned PS2 really too high a price to play the game now?

I just hope it's not due to some kind of "PC is better than consoles" fanboy attitude, because if the game isn't going to come out on PC, that argument doesn't hold much water.

Just curious.

I haven't owned a console since the original playstation debuted. I'm NOT a console gamer, 90% of the best and most influential games ever have come out on computer.

Consoles are mainly for the people that dont want to bother with the technical knowhow of computers, they want something they can just drop in and play.

Any game thats worth its salt that has come out on the console, ALWAYS comes out on PC, but not visa-versa.

Because I want to.

Would have to agree there...most really good games are on the PC first. Now there are exceptions of course...but for the most part, the developer has the most room to breath on a PC. That is why.

I own a console( XBOX, Gamecube)
Just prefer my PC for gameing, thats all.

Well I dont know but If I had to pick it would mos def. be console gaming. Most pc game are and will be better then there console counter part but the thing is , console gaming equals more games simply as that alot more quality games and different types of games also well aleast more genes then the pc.

Console are kinda limiting for me. My arguments are, PC allows more genre to be played rather than console.

For example, rts games like StarCraft, WarCraft series. Try playing that on a console, even with the keyboard or mouse add on. It would just be a pc gaming in a console form. If i want to play football games like EA Fifa, i can just plug in a joypad and enjoy it like i would on a console.

Downside on pc is, you have to spend some hefty sum for upgrades. Since most i believe, use computers to get their work done, i would say the upgrade is worthwhile.

I know some of us know SA looks like $hit on the PS2 and would rather play it on a PC the way it's meant to be played which is on a system that can handle the game, not on one that is struggling to run it with low frame rates, low quality textures, short draw distances, and no AA or AF....

My favorite genre is RPGs, and quite frankly, the vast majority of PC RPGs I've played have sucked- a lot. I'm just not a fan of the style. I get bored of MMORPGs in three minutes. Console ones, on the other hand, are fun and engaging- take Star Ocean, Final Fantasy, or Xenosaga as examples.

Then there're the first party titles, especially by Nintendo, that will never be released on PC, no matter how much people whine about it.

I'm a console gamer through-and-through and I don't think that'll change anytime soon. I don't have a problem with PC games usually having to be patched or console games lacking mods, etc. etc. I just know what I like.

Nope thats the point , really you made it yourself console gaming isnt limited and pc gaming is , truly and as consoles get more more pc like they games wont have the grapich qualitys of its pc counter parts , but you will still be able to play them plus all the console games you wont be able to play on pc.

Well, you guys are kind of missing the point, and at the same time reinforcing the idea that it's one or the other.

My question is why are you willing to dish out hundreds on PC upgrades to play the newest PC games, but unwilling to dish out substantially less than that to have the best of all worlds. It just doesn't make sense to complain about the wait for good console games to get ported to PC when all you have to do is pick up a console that costs less than half of what that new video card cost.

So far the replies have been, "I prefer PCs. They're better." Of course I'm paraphrasing, but it's not an answer to my question. Why not pick up a PS2 and an XBOX and then be able to play all the games you want when they come out, instead of having to wait for PC ports? If you don't like like console games period, then you can't really answer.

psybapunk says:



What is that? Is it a point of pride to not own a console? "I'm NOT a console gamer". You need the emphasis? Also, who cares if a game is the 'best' or 'most influential'? Isn't all that matters whether you like it or not? Is there a pride to be taken in the average review score of your game collection?

um, my snes doesn't work on my new tv.

whoops...meant to edit my old post, but hit reply. Anyways:


I mean, if it's worth the hundreds that it costs to keep your PC up to date so you can play the best PC games, isn't it worth $150 to get a full 3-4 years of playing the best games for that console? Over 3-4 years, it must cost well over a thousand dollars, maybe more than two, to keep your PC upgraded enough to play the new games.

I just buy all the consoles and build a mega PC that I wont upgrade/build (except minor stuff like RAM) for a few years. That way I get the best of both worlds.

Now you sir, are a video-gamer in the truest sense of the word.