PlayStation 3 vs Gaming PC

I am part of a new breed of Homo sapiens called "Gamers". This is an ever growing sub species and show marked variations in their interests, language and social behavior. We are also plagued with a feeling of awesomeness when playing certain games, which others fail to understand.

Gaming has shaped my life and had a huge impact on me. In other words all my failures are inadvertently attributed to gaming and the time it consumes. I was first introduced to gaming when my dad bought me a hand held brick game. From then onwards I have seen many generations of video games, more in line with the consoles.

My quench for better games, better gaming hardware and more gaming has led to my present condition. I had a PS3 but was not satisfied with it alone and before that when I had a PC I was never satisfied with it alone either. So like an Arab with two wives, I went ahead and got myself the best in both worlds. A PlayStation®3 and a Gaming PC. :-D

This can be seen as a console vs pc war or a marriage between consoles and PCs.

.
.

PlayStation®3
*in.playstation.com/media/252644/Main_PS3_Image_345w.png
PRICE: Rs.18500 (160GB) and Rs.20500 (320 GB)

I will skip the technical specifications and move on to what is important; Gaming.

Before all that I had to convince my parents into buying a 40" HDTV and constantly spam about how redundant 32" ones are (was more difficult in my case since we already had one 32incher, but the God of Games was with me)Now this is a INR 60000 expense that I did not add to the overall console gaming cost since it was primaily intended to be a TV and then a gaming display. But for ones building it from scratch, it is the biggest expense one will make.

Setup:
Step 1: Beg/Cry/Spam that you want a PS3™ no matter what and get it. If you are old enough skip step one and buy it yourself.
Step 2: Connect powercable and HDMI (to TV)
Step 3: Pop in a game
Step 4: Play till the contoller dies or you do :-D

I must say a console is the most comfortable way to play. It is the only one thing in the world that is manufactured for the sub species called gamers. It pampers you a lot and lets you concentrate on gaming.

Games and Gameplay:
The first 2 games I bought were God of War 3 and Heavy Rain. Both sold for Rs.2500 a piece back then. That ate away all the 5k I had saved up but no regrets. Both of these are amazing. Just amazing. The graphics, the sound the immersion was on a totally different level. I finished playing those in two weeks. After that my console gathered dust as my parents refused to buy me any games. But as fate had it, I have now more games to play than I have time to play them. Here is a list of the games I own:

◊ God of War 3
◊ Heavy Rain
◊ NFS Hot Pursuit
◊ Burnout Paradise City
◊ UFC 2010 (got it free; never played)
◊ Assassins Creed
◊ GTA 4
◊ Devil May Cry 4
◊ Bayonetta
◊ Blur
◊ Killzone 3
◊ Tekkan 6

AC and GoW missing; lent them to a friend*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/PS3/DSC_0220.jpg

All of this cost me: (Calculating...3...2..1...) Rs. 22600/- :shock:

Now thats a lot. Here comes my second point. The second biggest expense after a HDTV will be the games. My PS3 hasn't even touched its first anniversary yet.

More on the gameplay: The graphics are amazing, more fluid and realistic. The many games I played mesmerised me with their scenarios and music score (esp GoW). The controller feels like an extension of yourself and the improvements in its design over the years make it themost formidable gamign accesory. The joystick/joypad/controller is the best gaming device out there. There is nothing that can beat it. Also gaming on a 40" screen while sitting on a couch is both comfortable and immersive. The only area of weakness is shooters which are playable but a little tricky to aim and control.

Summary:

Pros:
• Cheaper initial investment
• Ease of use
• Controller gameplay is the most natural evolution of gaming
• Free online gameplay (through PSN)
• Longetivity (8-10year console life cycle)
• Lower power consumption (200W full load)
• Can play Blu Ray disks

Cons:
• Expensive games
• Poor porting of PC games
• FPS not one of its strongest point; lack of precision in comparison to PCs
• Absolutely no MMORPGs
• Older hardware (personally I dont care as long as it performs well; if a dead horse can win a race I would bet my money on it)

The console gaming experience is more fulfilling than any other. There is nothing like opening a can of pepsi, resting your butt on the couch, throwing your legs on the table, sit back and enjoy gaming on a large screen at the press of a button.

I usually play Racing games, Fighting games (like tekkan) and Adventures (like GoW, DMC etc) on the PS3. All my FPS and MMORPGs are limited to the PC.

◊ To sum it up consoles are easy to set up and a complete gaming experience, although expensive, prohibitively so for some people.

.
.

Monster in my room; A Gaming PC:
*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/DSC_0167.jpg

PRICE: INR 1,00,000/- (approx) courtesy TDF (including OS & speakers)

The core system cost only INR 62790. THE REST WERE MY SPLURGES WHICH ARE NOT RECOMMENDED

This is my configuration: Bought on 25.05.2011

NO DESCRIPTION MAKE & MODEL UNIT PRICE
1 PROCESSOR INTEL CORE i5 2500k 10395
2 MOTHERBOARD ASUS P8P67 PRO 12600
3 RAM G-SKILL RIPJAWS F3-12800CL9S-4GBRL 2625
4 GRAPHIC CARD SAPPHIRE HD6970 2GB 21000
5 HDD SEAGATE 1TB 7200.12 RPM 2625
6 DVD WRITTER SAMSUNG 22X SATA DVD 945
7 PSU COSAIR GS700 6300
8 CASE NZXT TEMPEST EVO 6300
9 MONITOR DELL ULTRASHARP U2311H 14323
10 MOUSE RAZER IMPERATOR 3150
11 KEYBOARD RAZER ARCTOSA 2158
12 MOUSE PAD STEELSERIES QCK 800
13 UPS APC 1.1KV 4500
14 OS MICROSOFT WINDOWS 7 7000
14 Speakers -- 5000
TOTAL 99722

For more pictures: No. of pics -6

1.Completely cannibalised my Study Table (which is actually a big office table)
*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/DSC00078.jpg

2.In Dark
*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/DSC00080.jpg

3.18+
*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/DSC_0165.jpg

4
*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/DSC_0166.jpg

5.Twin rotor (doesnt fly)
*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/DSC_0170.jpg

6.Last Pic
*i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc480/sarathmay3/DSC00079a.jpg

I remember the excitement when this PC finally arrived. I fail to express them in words but it just awesome to finally have this.

But getting this config in place was not easy. I started in mid-March and the config was finalised mid-May, which is when the purchase took place too. Starting with the digit magazine and then arriving on this forum, I created a thread "gam1ng-pc-70k". After what spanned through 100+ posts I finally had all the ingredients in place. Each component was thoroughly researched and subjected to critical review.
Finally I bought the parts, the details of which are in the main thread.

I waited for 2+ hours at the shop while it was being assembled. Came home and now the ordeal started.

Setup:
Step 1: I unboxed everything and made all the connections; monitor, UPS, CPU, Mouse, KB and the Wifi Dongle which didnt take as much time as it took to arrange all of it on my table.
Step 2: OS installation. Since I couldn't buy a Win 7 copy I used a trial version meanwhile. It spanned an hour or so.
Step 3: Intalling all drivers and softwares. 5+ hours.
Step 4: Install updates and Install games.
Step 5: Open "Preferences" and set the optimal resolution and calibrate the monitor
Step 6: Run the game. Go to options and max out settings and set optimum resolution.
Step 7: Play :-D

(finally)

I must say it was quite an ordeal. But since all of this happens only on the birth of a PC, I am not going to dwell further into it, nor am I going to consider it in the comparison.
However the installation of the games and setting them up to run is either the same or mostly a little longer than consoles.

Games and Gameplay:
Every single gaming device has its share of exclusives and the PC has not one but many. In fact being the most popular gaming devices besides PCs its difficult to estimate which is more popular.
My reason to get this PC was to play FPS games such as Crysis 2, CoD MW2 and BlackOps etc. Now this is where it shines. The amazing control given by the mouse is just too precise and convenient to be beaten in this department. It quickly shows you the shortcomings of the console controller.
The gameplay is amazing and the visuals are mesmerising. Cranking up the settings has given me the most realistic visuals I have ever seen on a PC before.
My other muse is MMORPG games. Although not in the pure sense as I dont play WoW etc but only Dota which is an online RPG. It is an old game and does not benefit from any upgrades except the mouse.
I am playing on a smaller screen so the difference is obvious but FPS are very immersive and hence it doesnt matter.
Now I dont recommend every one to buy a console but if you do want to play Racing games and others such as Assassins creed, I recommend buying a controller/joystick preferably the microsoft xbox controller for PC

The HD 6970 is a beast not the most powerful one but is formidable enough to max out settings at 1080p.
This should give me a few years of peace and ability to play latest games at high-medium settings.

Cost of games: The games are priced much better at prices ranging from Rs.500-1500. Mostly falling at 1k.

Now a lot of people don't buy games, which in itself is why there is a huge support for PC gaming in many. It is a personal moral choice though.

Hence in such a scenario, the cost of the PC and games dont factor well for comparison. The same is evident in this forum too where no discussion (or little) is made regarding online game play which is usually limited to legit copies.

Having said all that I too have fallen prey to such habit but I plan on buying Crysis 2, CoD 3, and Metro 2033 next month, just so to appreciate the online game play and prevent what we are already witnessing. The death of PC gaming or the decay of it (Read= Crysis 2 and its priorities)

The PC is limited to FPS games and MMORPGs in my case. There are strictly no racing or other genre games here. But the PC is equally good when coupled with a controller to play all these. Infact I would say that a PC with a good KB, a gaming mouse and a gaming controller is the most complete gaming system, capable of playing every genre of games. However compatibility issues plague the PC controller for some games.

Summary:

Pros:
• Better FPS and MMORPG experience
• Can play all or most of the games available on the consoles (except exclusive titles)
• Upgradeability -hardware upgrades can be made during its life time
• More powerful than current console hardware
• PC can be used for movies, surfing, video/photo editing, chatting etc etc
• Cheaper games
• Better graphics (I dont know about this, since I wont do a side by side comparison ever, for that is the stupidest thing to do)
• Mouse allows for enhanced precision
• Online game play (better experience than consoles)

Cons:
• Huge initial investment [even a decent gaming rig costs 50k]
• ~~Gaming on a smaller screen~~ (Ok not that big a problem)
• The Keyboard is the worst gaming accessory; the least ergonomic of all. But many swear by the KB so I think it has won many hearts. So this point transforms into a personal opinion. Key mapping and macros make it more user friendly.
• Requires regular updates in hardware as games are not tailored to run on older hardware in most cases (2-3year cycle)

◊ The PC is far more versatile than a consoles for it is built that way but in itself is a formidable gaming machine. I does not win over consoles but definitely has many advantages over it.

◊ On a neutral note, if you had a choice between them I would say go for a gaming PC. I am biased towards the consoles; they do have their advantages which is why many people own both a console and a PC.

Highly recommended for FPS and MMORPGs. Also for other genre like racing, TPS etc.

Final Summary:
◊ Despite owning both it is difficult to say which is better. It is impossible for me to ditch one for another. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. I love them dearly and honestly I don't care which one is better.

However for consoles I would say: Buy used games and borrow a lot. Buying new ones doesn't make any sense and is also a huge expenditure. Used games sell for around 500-1000 which is a steal.
For PCs: Buy a controller like the xbox one I mentioned for racing games and experience enhanced precision. Also get a decent gaming mouse as they are more ergonomic apart from other benefits. Even without these it is a formidable gaming machine.

I think I wrote a small book out here. :grin:

Any suggestions are welcome.

Thank you for reading.

.
.
.

The graphics are amazing, more fluid and realistic.

On PS3, this is after you played on PC? Well surely you don't look too carefully.

Gaming on a smaller screen

Nobody's stopping you from hooking up the HDTV to the computer while gaming bro.

Requires regular updates in hardware as games are not tailored to run on older hardware in most cases

A high-end configuration of Today will run at-least for 2 years without hitches in games. Plus, if you are into downloading, then compare this.

Your PS3 won't last half the time your computer is kept switched on. It would most probably die by then.

Havn't you read hardcore X360/PS3 people having to buy 3-4 consoles as their previous one dies and all?

The Keyboard is the worst gaming accessory; the least ergonomic of all.

I think it is the best. Where else do you get so many configurable keys to be used instantly in-game?

Just that the games don't use them.

Nice review.

My thoughts on this:

The joystick/joypad/controller is the best gaming device out there. There is nothing that can beat it

My mouse does, and I honestly believe X360 controller is more ergonomically designed than PS3 controller, X360 controller feels better.

The only area of weakness is shooters which are playable but a little tricky to aim and control.

The only reason I hate consoles, without 'auto-aim' aiming the controller can not be used in shooters, rpgs(that use guns like ME, F3).

Free online gameplay (through PSN)

And for PC it isn't?

Longetivity (8-10year console life cycle)

Do you mean the console life cycle or production life cycle? Consoles will not last you more than 3-4 yrs max, production life cycle is 10yrs(one more reason we won't get good pc games till 2015).

Expensive games

I agree very much.

The console gaming experience is more fulfilling than any other. There is nothing like opening a can of pepsi, resting your butt on the couch, throwing your legs on the table, sit back and enjoy gaming on a large screen at the press of a button.

I will say only one thing, X360 wireless controller.

OS installation. Since I couldn't buy a Win 7 copy I used a trial version meanwhile. It spanned an hour or so.

Took me 15 mins cause I installed using a pen drive. Its a one click process, if you want I can give you the link of the software.

Intalling all drivers and softwares.

How many softwares did you install exactly?

On this subject since we are discussing gaming pc we need to install, drivers, direct-x update and we are done, that should take 20mins max.

I must say it was quite an ordeal. But since all of this happens only on the birth of a PC, I am not going to dwell further into it, nor am I going to consider it in the comparison.
However the installation of the games and setting them up to run is either the same or mostly a little longer than consoles.

Agreed.

My reason to get this PC was to play FPS games such as Crysis 2, CoD MW2 and BlackOps etc. Now this is where it shines. The amazing control given by the mouse is just too precise and convenient to be beaten in this department. It quickly shows you the shortcomings of the console controller.

Agree again.

The gameplay is amazing and the visuals are mesmerising. Cranking up the settings has given me the most realistic visuals I have ever seen on a PC before.

Yes, anyone who played a pc game or saw one will say this.

Cost of games: The games are priced much better at prices ranging from Rs.500-1500. Mostly falling at 1k.

One more reason to go pc, most games will go around 700-900, which is a lot cheaper than console games.

Now a lot of people don't buy games, which in itself is why there is a huge support for PC gaming in many. It is a personal moral choice though.

No comments, but if you want a preview before buying the game........ :lol:

Gaming on a smaller screen

Why?

The Keyboard is the worst gaming accessory; the least ergonomic of all.

Do not agree at all, macros are the best features for keyboard.

Requires regular updates in hardware as games are not tailored to run on older hardware in most cases

Your setup will last you 2yrs, then you can just change the gpu, the cpu will last 3-5 yrs easily if gaming is your thing, ask asingh.

I give my vote to pc. But consoles are nice for those who are not oriented with pcs.

A good CPU can easily last 3-5 years while a GPU can last 2-3 years. It can give the console level visuals for a lot lot longer. Just think of people who had bought a Q6600 in 2007, I bet their CPU is more than enough for even current games. People who bought 8800GT back then can at least enjoy better visuals than the console counterparts.

The initial setting up of the PC should not even be considered guys. Installing Operating system and Drivers is just a one time process.
For people who already own a PC, it's cheaper to upgrade it rather than buy a new console for Rs 22000/-

But consoles are a good choice for Linux users.

Nice Review.

I personally vote for PC.

baccilus said:
A good CPU can easily last 3-5 years while a GPU can last 2-3 years. It can give the console level visuals for a lot lot longer. Just think of people who had bought a Q6600 in 2007, I bet their CPU is more than enough for even current games. People who bought 8800GT back then can at least enjoy better visuals than the console counterparts.

The initial setting up of the PC should not even be considered guys. Installing Operating system and Drivers is just a one time process.
For people who already own a PC, it's cheaper to upgrade it rather than buy a new console for Rs 22000/-

But consoles are a good choice for Linux users.

My friend has Q6600 @ 3GHz and he is an avid gamer, played all games as fine as I did, FPS was a bit lower but all that mattered is his card(560Ti).

If the Q6600 still has so much grunt just think of how long 2500K will last. People who own it will only have to upgrade once the next gen consoles are out and games graphics get a huge a bump.

baccilus said:
If the Q6600 still has so much grunt just think of how long 2500K will last. People who own it will only have to upgrade once the next gen consoles are out and games graphics get a huge a bump.

Anyone who bought a Q6600 or an equivalent CPU will be able to play all games till 2015(until new consoles come) easily(oc to 3GHz).

First of all, this is really a nice unbiased comparison. So I have made it a sticky for a while. Till at least, and new console comes out.

comp@ddict said:
On PS3, this is after you played on PC? Well surely you don't look too carefully.

I have a PS3 too. I hardly find a visual difference. Not that I will walk up to my 40" LED and look for details. But from 8" away, I love the graphics.

comp@ddict said:
Nobody's stopping you from hooking up the HDTV to the computer while gaming bro.

Yes true. But it is more difficult. You cannot game up close to an HDTV. So you either get a darn long HDMI cable, or use wireless keyboard / mouse combination.

comp@ddict said:
A high-end configuration of Today will run at-least for 2 years without hitches in games. Plus, if you are into downloading, then compare this.

The PS3 has been running since circa 2006.

comp@ddict said:
Your PS3 won't last half the time your computer is kept switched on. It would most probably die by then.

Havn't you read hardcore X360/PS3 people having to buy 3-4 consoles as their previous one dies and all?

That is quite not correct. I also know users whose PC's have failed just as fast. You cannot generalize. Umpteen users have PS3's which are running stellar after many years.

comp@ddict said:
I think it is the best. Where else do you get so many configurable keys to be used instantly in-game?

Just that the games don't use them.

Not really. Depends how many keys are actually mapped to the game code.

baccilus said:
But consoles are a good choice for Linux users.

Linux was disabled ages ago on Sony, why a mandatory FW release...!

For any of your Console point I agree. But I have to disagree on some PC points.

Sarath said:
Better FPS and MMORPG experience

One more RTS which are exclusive for PC till date. I mean looks at Company of Heroes, CnC Tiberium Wars, Starcraft 2 etc. Damn good games exclusive for PC.

Sarath said:
Gaming on a smaller screen

No one is stopping you to connect your PC to your HDTV.

Sarath said:
The Keyboard is the worst gaming accessory; the least ergonomic of all.

Its the best. Get a Logitech G510 and tell me.

Sarath said:
Requires regular updates in hardware as games are not tailored to run on older hardware in most cases

I am playing Dirt 3, Witcher 2 on my 4 year old PC.

Sarath said:
Now a lot of people don't buy games, which in itself is why there is a huge support for PC gaming in many. It is a personal moral choice though.

True.

Wow. Thanks for making this a sticky.

I read through all your replies and I was looking at constructive criticism to make this article more neutral and I got many.

However I would like to point out that I am mainly into consoles and look at PCs as something that either complements or completes my gaming experience. Now this is strictly my personal opinion and I didn't add this in the article up there as it would disturb the balance of its contents.

Also my personal barricade of not playing racing games is largely due to my personal bias towards towards consoles again. Again at no point did I mention that PCs are bad at racing games. With a controller they are equally good. Which I believe I mentioned.

Connecting the PC to the TV is something I never though of, nor will I. I don't know how many do that but for me that is quite an absurd proposition. For this I wanted to add that between a 40" HDTV at 6 feet and a 23" at 1.5" it is the latter that actually covers a larger visual area. But it is beyond my explanatory capabilities as to why we find the former is better. In fact I think a 23/24incher is somewhat optimum for PC gaming.

Online gaming is a part of a legit copy. Apart from a single friend of mine I have never seen anyone do that. And I have got rich loaded friends but that hasn't changed anything. So I have come across many who have played the game but stay mum on online game play discussion. Now I did not want to standardize it. I only merely forgot to mention the point and will edit it to add the point. Forgive this ignorant human.

The keyboard is one thing I want to change. A software with easy key mapping and macros will make it easier but doing that for every game is cumbersome. I am having problems with the KB because of certain games I play and also the odd placement of keys. I always wanted something like a controller to move the character and a mouse to aim. Just my opinion. I made a point up there on an ergonomic standpoint, since the keys for gaming are not optimally placed. I mean look at the WASD cluster, those are not even symmetrical. It is just that we have gotten used to it. Also the shift and alt buttons, not to mention the various other action keys are placed in a way that can cause serious fatigue and strain to the hand.

I am not right in everything, I am aware of that. But it is hard for me to look at it in a different perspective. Also after owning both of them, its unlikely I would now be more biased towards any one.

Not really. Depends how many keys are actually mapped to the game code.

Thats exactly what I said

That is quite not correct. I also know users whose PC's have failed just as fast. You cannot generalize. Umpteen users have PS3's which are running stellar after many years.

Both have their share.

The PS3 has been running since circa 2006.

yeah, we know this is the console generation after all.

I hardly find a visual difference.

Thanks to a failure of implementation of a so called revolutionary feature called DX11, and the having to rely heavily on an API and not having direct access to hardware. Microsoft, that's why I don't buy their products(I'm forced to anyways while buying a laptop)

asingh said:
Linux was disabled ages ago on Sony, why a mandatory FW release...!

I meant it is great for people who are not using Windows. I am a Linux user but I have to keep a Windows partition because I like to play. If I had a console and if legit console games cost the same as PC games, I could have used only Linux on my PC.

BTW, I would never connect my PC to a HDTV to play FPS. But for playing games that can be played with a controller, I would surely connect the PC to the HDTV.

Sarath said:
Wow. Thanks for making this a sticky.

I read through all your replies and I was looking at constructive criticism to make this article more neutral and I got many.

However I would like to point out that I am mainly into consoles and look at PCs as something that either complements or completes my gaming experience. Now this is strictly my personal opinion and I didn't add this in the article up there as it would disturb the balance of its contents.

Also my personal barricade of not playing racing games is largely due to my personal bias towards towards consoles again. Again at no point did I mention that PCs are bad at racing games. With a controller they are equally good. Which I believe I mentioned.

Connecting the PC to the TV is something I never though of, nor will I. I don't know how many do that but for me that is quite an absurd proposition. For this I wanted to add that between a 40" HDTV at 6 feet and a 23" at 1.5" it is the latter that actually covers a larger visual area. But it is beyond my explanatory capabilities as to why we find the former is better. In fact I think a 23/24incher is somewhat optimum for PC gaming.

Online gaming is a part of a legit copy. Apart from a single friend of mine I have never seen anyone do that. And I have got rich loaded friends but that hasn't changed anything. So I have come across many who have played the game but stay mum on online game play discussion. Now I did not want to standardize it. I only merely forgot to mention the point and will edit it to add the point. Forgive this ignorant human.

The keyboard is one thing I want to change. A software with easy key mapping and macros will make it easier but doing that for every game is cumbersome. I am having problems with the KB because of certain games I play and also the odd placement of keys. I always wanted something like a controller to move the character and a mouse to aim. Just my opinion. I made a point up there on an ergonomic standpoint, since the keys for gaming are not optimally placed. I mean look at the WASD cluster, those are not even symmetrical. It is just that we have gotten used to it. Also the shift and alt buttons, not to mention the various other action keys are placed in a way that can cause serious fatigue and strain to the hand.

I am not right in everything, I am aware of that. But it is hard for me to look at it in a different perspective. Also after owning both of them, its unlikely I would now be more biased towards any one.

The belkin/razer nostromo is what you want, it combines the best of KB and controller into one and I belive its better than a keyboard and a controller.

comp@ddict said:
Thats exactly what I said

Both have their share.

yeah, we know this is the console generation after all.

Thanks to a failure of implementation of a so called revolutionary feature called DX11, and the having to rely heavily on an API and not having direct access to hardware. Microsoft, that's why I don't buy their products(I'm forced to anyways while buying a laptop)

Thanks to the consoles holding us back, dx11, if implemented right would have looked good.

I know of the nostromo. But its out of my budget. In fact I though of getting it when the KB started frustrating me but the games I play will fail even that. I will need to map keys and stuff which is tedious.

Sarath said:
I know of the nostromo. But its out of my budget. In fact I though of getting it when the KB started frustrating me but the games I play will fail even that. I will need to map keys and stuff which is tedious.

I am planning to get it soon, now to do research and read reviews.

There's actually another take on this and i actually support sarath's opinion of marrying the console and the pc.

The correct word is exclusivity. Ps3 has a hell lot of exclusives that even an avid pc only gamer with a powerful gtx 580 cannot enjoy.

Some examples are god of war (series), heavy rain , killzone (series), the critically acclaimed uncharted series, metal gear solid series, project trico ( ico, shadow of the colossus & the last guardian) and so on. There are no alternatives to these on a pc. The reason being lots of first party developers for sony.
* Just find a game in pc that can match the gameplay setting of shadow of the collossus.
These marvels simply cannot be enjoyed on a pc especially a game of uncharted's caliber. Can anybody name a pc- spinoff that can match uncharted? The answer is there's nothing like it anywhere.
Now this is only experienced with a ps3.

Pc's are all about fps's and rpg's and consoles are kind of into everything. Not to forget the amazing motion controls that are now getting a huge push and are really doing well. They just open up a new dimension.

So i support both of them and consoles like ps3 especially for the exclusives that they bring and simply cannot be enjoyed on anyother platform.

@Vickybat: You have a solid argument. But what to do about the exorbitant prices of games on consoles? Are second hands readily available?

But what to do about the exorbitant prices of games on consoles? Are second hands readily available?

Yes they are, not that readily.

But they are hailed as WORSE than piracy after all by the game devs.

You put a GTX 580 chip on a console. It will perform twice as fast as it performs on a PC. Why? There won't be any hardware abstraction layer bottleneck. Everything would be optimized.

Well honestly both have shares of exclusive and like I said before RTS games are not for consoles and I do know that not many players play this genre but for me its one of the best genre and I play it a lot and quite honestly if everything will be on console except RTS then I'll buy a PC just for RTS.

ico said:
You put a GTX 580 chip on a console. It will perform twice as fast as it performs on a PC. Why? There won't be any hardware abstraction layer bottleneck. Everything would be optimized

Yeah and thats where the problem arises. You can't because its a limitation of consoles.

tkin said:
Thanks to the consoles holding us back, dx11, if implemented right would have looked good.

This is the biggest misconception which the gaming community is living in. Why is it the fault of consoles. Why cannot not the developers right code which is specific to all the platforms. It is because game studios are lazy OR the finance houses are pushy that reverse porting happens and we see the wonders off consolization to the PC game. What is stopping them from creating a Dx11 build and a separate build for the console hardware. The hardware is moving quicker than the gaming studios -- for whom it is created in the first place.

If anyone has the budget to accomodate good hardware. The PC will give a lot better experience than a PS3

ico said:
You put a GTX 580 chip on a console. It will perform twice as fast as it performs on a PC. Why? There won't be any hardware abstraction layer bottleneck. Everything would be optimized.

It would be great. Not possible. The PS3 has a GPU equvalent to the 7xxx series NVIDIA card

ico said:
You put a GTX 580 chip on a console. It will perform twice as fast as it performs on a PC. Why? There won't be any hardware abstraction layer bottleneck. Everything would be optimized.

Exactly. If we see the current ps3's gpu ( the RSX ( reality synthesizer) ) , its merely an nvidia 7800 series gpu and doesn't even have a unified shader architecture. But lets not forget that the cell cpu's spe's can also perform some vertex shading & some rendering as well. So the gpu is totally assisted by cell.

Putting a gtx 580 chip will take the performance skyhigh and like you said , without any hardware abstraction layer & extreme optimisations. I think the next gen consoles will get this treatment.

gameranand said:
Well honestly both have shares of exclusive and like I said before RTS games are not for consoles and I do know that not many players play this genre but for me its one of the best genre and I play it a lot and quite honestly if everything will be on console except RTS then I'll buy a PC just for RTS.

Yeah and thats where the problem arises. You can't because its a limitation of consoles.

Well buddy ps3 exclusives cannot be matched by any platform currently and this is the truth.

And it was never the limitations of console but the kind of hardware available when the consoles were made. Consoles are not modified now and then unlike pc's ( but pc is not only for gaming). They are build to complete their product lifecycle and deliver the best within the particular timeframe.

The upcoming ps4 & the xbox 720 will be employing current hardware and they will be much faster than current consoles. Asingh's post makes absolute sense. Gamedevelopers are paid more to optimize their code for console hardware and even to develop exclusively for consoles. So pc users are left out in the cold.

So the bottomline is:

You cannot compare pc gaming with console gaming. They are two very very different platforms.

Interesting reads:
Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX - Wolfire Games Blog
DirectX vs. OpenGL revisited - Wolfire Games Blog

^^ Thanks those were really interesting reads. I wonder though even after getting all the answers that why game developers don't go with OpenGL.

gameranand said:
I wonder though even after getting all the answers that why game developers don't go with OpenGL.

MICRO$OFT

Great read Ico

ico said:
Interesting reads:
Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX - Wolfire Games Blog
DirectX vs. OpenGL revisited - Wolfire Games Blog

Very interesting and its a terrific article. Nice find ico. Micro$oft is a big b!tch and developers blindly follow them apart from a few exceptions like the legendary "john carmack". I can't wait to play rage and its a fantastic looking game.

I think ps3 developers should port games onto the linux platform since they both use opengl api. It will be a direct competition to microsoft's monopoly.

What say buddy?

Why is it the fault of consoles. Why cannot not the developers right code which is specific to all the platforms

Because consoles have greater sales hence devs don't wanna waste time on PC.

Personally, if Devs spend more resources on PC gaming, they would receive sales.

They expect that their silly console ports on PC will sell a lot. How stupid. And they blame us PC gamers.

vickybat said:
I think ps3 developers should port games onto the linux platform since they both use opengl api. It will be a direct competition to microsoft's monopoly.

You mean porting those ps3 exclusive titles to Linux platform?!
They're exclusives for a reason..PS3. Obviously theres no point in porting them onto other platforms.

^^ Exclusives can do turn into multiplatforms. And the only way for ps3 to fight against xbox + windows is to embrace linux and make it a popular gaming platform.
Remember what happened to devil may cry, mgs ,etc. Once ps3 exclusives , now in the xbox and windows platform.

Right now mutiplatforms make more money so i think it will a stepping stone for sony if they develop for linux and encourage many third party developers to do so.
Coming to the linux platform would mean coming to the pc and it will be grea for pc gamers. It will be easier to port as well owing to the sharing of similar api's.

PC Gamers deserve Gran Turismo 5 badly! It will pwn most track based Pc games out there. Too bad we havent got it :cry:

comp@ddict said:
Because consoles have greater sales hence devs don't wanna waste time on PC.

Personally, if Devs spend more resources on PC gaming, they would receive sales.

They expect that their silly console ports on PC will sell a lot. How stupid. And they blame us PC gamers.

I really do not understand how high sales of consoles can be blamed for poor game development of PC.

vickybat said:
^^ Exclusives can do turn into multiplatforms. And the only way for ps3 to fight against xbox + windows is to embrace linux and make it a popular gaming platform.
Remember what happened to devil may cry, mgs ,etc. Once ps3 exclusives , now in the xbox and windows platform.

Right now mutiplatforms make more money so i think it will a stepping stone for sony if they develop for linux and encourage many third party developers to do so.
Coming to the linux platform would mean coming to the pc and it will be grea for pc gamers. It will be easier to port as well owing to the sharing of similar api's.

Sorry, I was talking about the IPs Sony owns, like God of War, Uncharted, Gran Turismo etc.
Theres no way those games will make their way to other platforms.
I mean, those exclusives are the selling point for playstation 3, why in the world will sony go multiplatform with those titles. Except, ofcourse the MMOs like DC Universe Online.

^^ I am not talking about any other platforms but only linux. This way, sony can move to the pc territory and support opengl which desperately need some powerful backing. Its the only way to stop the monopoly of micro$oft.

Well not the best selling ip's right away but they should make some move in this regard.
Its just my thought though. Was kind of inspired by reading those articles ico gave. :smile:

I would say the same thing. Exclusives are selling point for PS3, and theres no point releasing their titles on linux just because its OpenGL. According to Carmack, OpenGL performs and looks great on across all the platforms. Be it windows, Linux, iOS etc...
So why Linux only?

DirectX and OpenGL are equally good, atleast from what Carmack said. So dont expect that the games are going to look like BF3 or may be better, just because the developers use OpenGL. But its the support from the vendors thats too bad incase of OpenGL...All thanks to Micro$oft's marketing crap with that dx0 vs dx10 comparision $hit.

Let me play the devil's advocate here, since the issue of linux gaming was raised.

One thing MS doesn't get enough credit for, is how easy it has made gaming by forcing developers to stick to DX standards. I remember days when you, as the user, had to fiddle with Soundblaster IRQs, set the DMA channels, and sometimes even flip onboard jumpers to get a game to work.

DX eliminated all that and for a developer, instead of having to write specific codes for the potentially infinite CPU+GPU+RAM combination, made coding for PCs easier.

The thing ppl forget about coding for consoles, is that it's easy to push the limits of a machine when there's only one SKU to worry about. With a 360 or PS3 or the Wii, you know there's only one video card and CPU whose capabilities are well known and can be exploited. Q&A/support for console games is cheaper than for PCs, which is one of the hidden reasons behind the PC's slump as a gaming platform.

Gaming on Linux will be a nightmare, due to sheer fragmentation. You have to develop an RPM, YAST, DEB and countless other versions of installers, and god help you as a company if the video driver isn't upto scratch.

I ran Unigine for Linux on my system(ubuntu 11.04 with AMD drivers) and the performance was notably slower than windows, but way faster than the open-source radeon drivers. Before anyone bashes AMD's linux drivers, please read any article on Phoronix, and you'll find that Nvidia's linux drivers are slower than their windows counterparts as well.

The situation would be similar to the headaches devs face while making apps for Android. There are so many devices, with so many variations of resolution, memory, and CPU speed, that it's impossible make a game that will work on all of them.

Which is why the quality of Apps for the Iphone is much better, even though in hardware terms, there are android phones far more powerful than the Iphone 4. But since there's only 4 models of the Iphone and Ipod touch, it's much easier to code for.

As for the whole PS3 vs PC debate, I like the fact that a console lets me involve others in Co-op play with another controller, which isn't something that's widely supported in PCs yet.

Both have their strengths, and I use my PCs for FPS and RTS, while for Racing/Fighting/Sports games, I use my 360

And the white elephant in the room called Piracy is a major factor. Let's not pretend that none of us have ever torrented or frequented NODVD sites. I like the consoles for the fact that it has kept the industry alive.

For all the wonderful work that Crytek did with the original Crysis, how many copies did they sell? Around 2-3 million I think. Which is why they had to get into the console market, to survive as a developer.

vickybat said:
^^ Exclusives can do turn into multiplatforms. And the only way for ps3 to fight against xbox + windows is to embrace linux and make it a popular gaming platform.
Remember what happened to devil may cry, mgs ,etc. Once ps3 exclusives , now in the xbox and windows platform.

Right now mutiplatforms make more money so i think it will a stepping stone for sony if they develop for linux and encourage many third party developers to do so.
Coming to the linux platform would mean coming to the pc and it will be grea for pc gamers. It will be easier to port as well owing to the sharing of similar api's.

Nope they won't. You are not getting the point of exlusives here. The main reason Sony encourages First party developers to make quality AAA is to move hardware. Its not a copy of the game they sell that they take as a standard. But, how many ps3 units is this game capable of moving. Because, when you sell a game.. you only sell a game. But, when you sell a hardware... you will be selling a hardware+titles to play that on hardware. And Sony, infact any console manufacturer, will never publish their title on secondary platforms just because they hate one/other console manufacturer.

And, Titles like DMC, Tekken, MGS have gone multiplatfrom just because they were thirdparty exclusives.

And, seriously speaking.. Profit that sony can make by coming to Linux will be no where near to the profits it is getting by exclusivity deal. Not only sony.. also, Nintendo.

I agree with what Vamsi says. But there's a delicious addendum to this.

Any 360 exclusive game can be easily ported to Windows, because the underlying architecture is very similar. But they delay ports of the big exclusives (Halo, Gears of War etc..) so that the hardware sales aren't affected.

End of the day, you have to realise that the installed base on PCs is far greater than the sales of this generation combined. But 97% of that market is Windows, so as a developer there's no incentive to focus on Linux.

vamsi_krishna said:
Nope they won't. You are not getting the point of exlusives here. The main reason Sony encourages First party developers to make quality AAA is to move hardware. Its not a copy of the game they sell that they take as a standard. But, how many ps3 units is this game capable of moving. Because, when you sell a game.. you onlyl sell a game. But, when you sell a hardware... you will be selling a hardware+titles to play that on hardware. And Sony, infact any console manufacturer, will never publish their tilte on secnodary platforms just because they hate one/other console manufacturer.

And, seriously speaking.. Profit that sony can make by coming to Linux will be no where near to the profits it is getting by exclusivity deal. Not only sony.. also, Nintendo.

I absolutely get the point of exclusives and i very well know that they are the selling point of their consoles. All i want is that they follow the windows + xbox strategy i.e develop some multiplatforms for linux and only their console i.e ps3. So some titles become ps3 and linux exclusive and not windows. Not every other developer should support linux but some sony owned development studios. Microsoft cannot monopolize here.

I am not saying they should port uncharted , god of war or any other aaa title. Does microsoft port its aaa titles like forza, alanwake, bayonetta, halo (no ports from 360), etc. No,they make it console exclusive but alongside also support development for windows platform.

Is xbox's sales failing due to the fact that some of their games are also playable in the windows platform? Heck there are also plans of unveiling a kinect based controller for the windows platform. So microsoft are suppoting their product and api's.

So they make money in all of the above cases. What i am saying is sony should support development for linux and make some games in its library as ps3 + linux exclusive and not windows. This way, it can bring down the fight to microsoft in a better way.

Remember that pc is not a gaming platform only and it doesn't have any competition. The fact that a pc can support multiple platforms makes it a potential weapon for sony and microsoft. Microsoft has done that, sony should follow. This is the way i see it. It may not happen but i feel it should.

asingh said:
I really do not understand how high sales of consoles can be blamed for poor game development of PC.

Haha thats a shame then.

High sales = More money from consoles

Which leaves Devs wary of spending TIME and RESOURCES and EFFORT to make the game any better, or optimized at all for the PC.

Is that hard to grasp?

cyborg47 said:
I would say the same thing. Exclusives are selling point for PS3, and theres no point releasing their titles on linux just because its OpenGL. According to Carmack, OpenGL performs and looks great on across all the platforms. Be it windows, Linux, iOS etc...
So why Linux only?

Supporting windows means feeding micro$oft. And sony would not do that. That's why i brought linux to the picture because its in direct intervention with microsoft. You can say mac as platform but again it comes from sony's competitor i.e apple. So linux has the potential of becoming a gaming weapon imo which it desperately needs in order to compete with windows in the mainstream market. Sure opengl can be coded better to work on windows but do you think micro$oft will support that?

cyborg47 said:
DirectX and OpenGL are equally good, atleast from what Carmack said. So dont expect that the games are going to look like BF3 or may be better, just because the developers use OpenGL. But its the support from the vendors thats too bad incase of OpenGL...All thanks to Micro$oft's marketing crap with that dx0 vs dx10 comparision $hit.

I beg to differ. Opengl is more powerful than directX. The tesselation techniques that dx11 uses were present in opengl three years ago. Ofcourse games have the potential of looking better in opengl than dx11. But as i said earlier, windows can also be the choice of platform buT won't happen thanks to miro$soft.

That's the reason why carmack used opengl in its upcoming shooter "RAGE"

I know what i'm saying is pretty far fetched but is a possibility and who knows may even become a reality.

Nice thread....

And I didn't see Read Dead Redemption in your list...
You should definitely play that game..I think it's one of the best titles ever released on consoles..

I somewhat agree with vickybat. The reason is that we all know that very few people use Linux so it isn't going to a large no. of people at all not unless they install Linux and buy the game and even then it will reach relatively smaller audience than Windows. So exclusivity is kind of maintained but yes it is near impossible.

Are you guys talking about porting every PS3 game to linux?

Ishu Gupta said:
Are you guys talking about porting every PS3 game to linux?

Not all but some which are not selling point of PS3.

gameranand said:
Not all but some which are not selling point of PS3.

All minus the exclusives?

vickybat said:
I absolutely get the point of exclusives and i very well know that they are the selling point of their consoles. All i want is that they follow the windows + xbox strategy i.e develop some multiplatforms for linux and only their console i.e ps3. So some titles become ps3 and linux exclusive and not windows. Not every other develop should support linux but some sony owned development studios. Microsoft cannot monopolize here.

I am not saying they should port uncharted , god of war or any other aaa title. Does microsoft port its aaa titles like forza, alanwake, bayonetta, halo (no ports from 360), etc. No,they make it console exclusive but alongside also support development for windows platform.

Is xbox's sales failing due to the fact that some of their games are also playable in the windows platform? Heck there are also plans of unveiling a kinect based controller for the windows platform. So microsoft are suppoting their product and api's.

So they make money in all of the above cases. What i am saying is sony should support development for linux and make some games in its library as ps3 + linux exclusive and not windows. This way, it can bring down the fight to microsoft in a better way.

Remember that pc is not a gaming platform only and it desn't have any competition. The fact that a pc can support multiple platforms makes it a potential weapon for sony and microsoft. Microsoft has done that, sony should follow. This is the way i see it. It may not happen but i feel it should.

You are again missing one thing here. Microsoft backed DX and made it a gold sheet, just because Microsoft wanted to promote their... Operating System. Lets not forget.... PS3 does not own any operating systems that will run on PC. All you are suggesting is just by one point "MS is a monopoly. We need to bring it down.", "DX is the on the top now. we need to bring it down too". Sony is neither a charity firm, nor a Chuck Norris firm to pull that off. The damn.. SCE division was running with negative profits until 2009 for god's sake.

vickybat said:
I beg to differ. Opengl is more powerful than directX. The tesselation techniques that dx11 uses were present in opengl three years ago. Ofcouse games have the potential of looking better in opengl than dx11. But as i said earlier, windows can also be the choice of platform buT won't happen thanks to miro$soft.

That's the reason why carmack used opengl in its upcoming shooter "RAGE"

I know what i'm saying is pretty far fetched but is a possibility and who knows may even become a reality.

Ah cmon!..Tesselation presence in OpenGL three years ago makes it powerful?! lol
Alrite, lets just suppose OpenGL IS powerful than DirectX..and Carmack is OpenGL supporter and his games use it, then RAGE on PC should look as good as, or better than BF3(which according to DICE is developed on DX11)..lets wait and see

Is there a RAGE pc gameplay or a tech demo video out there?

cyborg47 said:
Is there a RAGE pc gameplay or a tech demo video out there?

A lot of em google it.

Nah..They're all taken from console. But still looks kick-ass! especially the textures look crisp.
And I dont think theres a PC gameplay video till now.

^^Then check these:

E3 2010 Stage Demo: Rage (PC) - GameSpot Video

Oh yeah..thats the PC version.
Now according to what you said (that OpenGL>DX)Rage should look better if you compare it to the other dx11 shooters(BF3)..not that it isnt looking good, its great! So it all depends on the developers and how well they use the APIs in their games.
Thats all that I wanted to say.

vamsi_krishna said:
You are again missing one thing here. Microsoft backed DX and made it a gold sheet, just because Microsoft wanted to promote their... Operating System. Lets not forget.... PS3 does not own any operating systems that will run on PC. All you are suggesting is just by one point "MS is a monopoly. We need to bring it down.", "DX is the on the top now. we need to bring it down too". Sony is neither a charity firm, nor a Chuck Norris firm to pull that off. The damn.. SCE division was running with negative profits until 2009 for god's sake.

They don't need to come up with their own operating system.
They don't need tons of money either to promote development on linux like micosoft.

Since the underlying api's are so similar, porting won't be a problem. Linux is an "open platfom" unlike microsoft. So sony won't have to pay any sort of "royalty" to anyone unlike developers paying to microsoft.

Its not some ordeal to simply pull off but expand in terms of providing content & simultaneosly do battle. Good for both console and pc gamers imo.
Sure SCE was in losses but look at them now. They have redefined gaming in many ways. They can do it for linux too and back opengl in the same process.

Good for the future of gaming.

And LOL similar APIs. most of the first party games will use lower level APIs to get maximum out of hardware. Which is not the same case when it comes to PC. Hence, loss of integrity.

Yes. They need money. Lot of it. What DX is today is not just a mere wand job. It took plenty of time.. and god knows how much man and money from microsoft side. To battle this 15year old thing.. is not easy when they have to battle MS, Nintendo on console market along side. Sony is just a firm not the god. Be realistic.

vickybat said:
They don't need to come up with their own operating system.
They don't need tons of money either to promote development on linux like micosoft.

Since the underlying api's are so similar, porting won't be a problem. Linux is an "open platfom" unlike microsoft. So sony won't have to pay any sort of "royalty" to anyone unlike developers paying to microsoft.

Its not some ordeal to simply pull off but expand in terms of providing content & simultaneosly do battle. Good for both console and pc gamers imo.
Sure SCE was in losses but look at them now. They have redefined gaming in many ways. They can do it for linux too and back opengl in the same process.

Good for the future of gaming.

I understand. Microsoft has Windows, and you want sony to have linux.
But why the hell would sony even want to go to Linux in the first place?!
They're not doing some kinda social service in the gaming industry here lol.
What you're saying is perfectly possible, sony can fall in love with linux and pull it up yes.

^^ Not to have linux but to support it. Buying and supporting are two different things. They are parallel and they never meet. Doing this will make them support opengl and that is actually the whole point of this discussion.

It can be linux or something xyz. But linux seems more appropriate and achievable than designing something from scratch.

vickybat said:
They don't need to come up with their own operating system.
They don't need tons of money either to promote development on linux like micosoft.

Microsoft promotes windows and DX is because they developed it themselves. Thats their business.
Sony has got nothing to do with Linux or OpenGL. Therefore, Sony supporting Linux wont happen. peace

vickybat said:
^^ Not to have linux but to support it. Buying and supporting are two different things. They are parallel and they never meet. Doing this will make them support opengl and that is actually the whole point of this dicussion.

It can be linux or something xyz. But linux seems more appropriate and achievable than designing something from scratch.

Dude, I understand you love OpenGL, but dont expect developers to bring graphics like crysis 10 or something. Like I already said, both are equally good when the developers want to use it. It was different back in 2005 when the devs were switching from OpenGL to DX (ofcourse because of the microsoft's marketing crap), and it was difficult for them to get used to the DX API, and thats when Carmack said the devs didnt have to shoot their foot with dx to develop games, he said that OpenGL can do everything that DX can. But the situation is different now, look at BF3, its looking great coz DICE is using the DX11 APIs properly.

vamsi_krishna said:
And LOL similar APIs. most of the first party games will use lower level APIs to get maximum out of hardware. Which is not the same case when it comes to PC. Hence, loss of integrity.

Yes. They need money. Lot of it. What DX is today is not just a mere wand job. It took plenty of time.. and god knows how much man and money from microsoft side. To battle this 15year old thing.. is not easy when they have to battle MS, Nintendo on console market along side. Sony is just a firm not the god. Be realistic.

The graphics API for the PS3 is called OpenGL ES 2.0 (short for Embedded System) which is a subset of OpenGL 2.0. OpenGL is an open standard defined and promoted by the Khronos group. It is also of note that while the RSX should be DirectX9 compliant the PS3 will not use DirectX for it's games as DirectX is not a native API of the Linux enviroment which the PS3 uses.

Check this for more info. Now you know what i am talking about and why linux should be the chosen platform if such things ever becomes a reality. There's no significant loss of integrity here.

I am being realistic. Don't expect sony to win battles straight away with this move but put a halt to microsoft's monopoly if not a "screeching halt".

Nothing is easy but making slow but significant moves assures a certain victory although its gonna be time consuming. Sure the task here is insurmountable & even the idea is a bit far fetched, its not by a great degree.

cyborg47 said:
Microsoft promotes windows and DX is because they developed it themselves. Thats their business.
Sony has got nothing to do with Linux or OpenGL. Therefore, Sony supporting Linux wont happen. peace

Please refer my reply to vamsi in this very post buddy. I guess you would want to eat the words in bold after reading that.

vickybat said:
The graphics API for the PS3 is called OpenGL ES 2.0 (short for Embedded System) which is a subset of OpenGL 2.0. OpenGL is an open standard defined and promoted by the Khronos group. It is also of note that while the RSX should be DirectX9 compliant the PS3 will not use DirectX for it's games as DirectX is not a native API of the Linux enviroment which the PS3 uses.

Check this for more info. Now you know what i am talking about and why linux should be the chosen platform if such things ever becomes a reality. There's no significant loss of integrity here.

I am being realistic. Don't expect sony to win battles straight away with this move but put a halt to microsoft's monopoly if not a "screeching halt".

Nothing is easy but making slow but significant moves assures a certain victory although its gonna be time consuming. Sure the task here is insurmountable & even the idea is a bit far fetched, its not by a great degree.

LOL..victory from what? Microsoft is not Evil here, are they?

Calm down and read everything properly first, Vamsi said most of the 'first party developers' use the low level API's and dont entirely depend on the OpenGL. Its the third party developers or the multi-platform developers who use the OpenGL because its not as time consuming as working through the low level API's (directly with the hardware).

And btw, its OpenGL-ES 1.0 that playstation 3 uses, not 2.0

cyborg47 said:
Dude, I understand you love OpenGL, but dont expect developers to bring graphics like crysis 10 or something. Like I already said, both are equally good when the developers want to use it. It was different back in 2005 when the devs were switching from OpenGL to DX (ofcourse because of the microsoft's marketing crap), and it was difficult for them to get used to the DX API, and thats when Carmack said the devs didnt have to shoot their foot with dx to develop games, he said that OpenGL can do everything that DX can. But the situation is different now, look at BF3, its looking great coz DICE is using the DX11 APIs properly.

Check the following:

Battlefield 3 vs Rage: HD Screenshot Comparison - GamingBolt.com: Video Game News, Reviews, Previews and Blog

Why Rage will be a Better Title than Battlefield 3 << Gaming Irresponsibly Â» Gaming Irresponsibly

The upcoming doom4 which will use the modified id tech 5 engine will be graphically 3-4 times richer than rage according to "john carmack". So hopefully it might change the opinion of many developers on opengl.

rchi84 said:
Let me play the devil's advocate here, since the issue of linux gaming was raised.

One thing MS doesn't get enough credit for, is how easy it has made gaming by forcing developers to stick to DX standards. I remember days when you, as the user, had to fiddle with Soundblaster IRQs, set the DMA channels, and sometimes even flip onboard jumpers to get a game to work.

DX eliminated all that and for a developer, instead of having to write specific codes for the potentially infinite CPU+GPU+RAM combination, made coding for PCs easier.

You are talking about pre-OpenGL era here.

Game development was done directly to the hardware at that time. DirectX doesn't get any sort of credit for that. OpenGL came before as an API.

Direct3D only started to get popular from (and after) version 9 and only due to Microsoft's FUD. Heck, OpenGL was better and faster compared to it. Just compare the graphics of Doom 3 with Half-life 2.

vickybat said:
Check the following:

Battlefield 3 vs Rage: HD Screenshot Comparison - GamingBolt.com: Video Game News, Reviews, Previews and Blog

Why Rage will be a Better Title than Battlefield 3 << Gaming Irresponsibly Â» Gaming Irresponsibly

The upcoming doom4 which will use the modified id tech 5 engine will be graphically 3-4 times richer than rage according to "john carmack". So hopefully it might change the opinion of many developers on opengl.

Ah please! dont bring the sreenshot comparision. Ditch them, your life gets better

and some of the rage screenshots are from a console and its all BS

All I suggest is to wait till both the games release, and then compare them yourselves.

ico said:
graphics of Doom 3 with Half-life 2.

I find HL2 look MUCH better

Then again, its a bad comparision..a very bad one infact. One is a corridor shooter, rarely has outdoor environments, and the other one is a sandbox style linear shooter with a lot of huge outdoor environments, and some real good physics

cyborg47 said:
I find HL2 look MUCH better

* at the time of release.

It used to be a subjective opinion at that time anyways.

and I haven't said X game used to look better than Y.

cyborg47 said:
LOL..victory from what? Microsoft is not Evil here, are they?

Calm down and read everything properly first, Vamsi said most of the 'first party developers' use the low level API's and dont entirely depend on the OpenGL. Its the third party developers or the multi-platform developers who use the OpenGL because its not as time consuming as working through the low level API's (directly with the hardware).

And btw, its OpenGL-ES 1.0 that playstation 3 uses, not 2.0

I am calm. :smile:

I have read everything that vamsi said and meant. I don't know what consoles he meant but ps3 relies on opengl ES and PSGL which is absolutely based on opengl ES. Ps3 also uses nvidia's CG. Btw PS3 also utilizes a lot of features of opengl 2.0

Check here.

A quote from wiki

wiki said:
OpenGL ES 1.0 - Supported by the PlayStation 3 as one of official graphics APIs[5] (the other one being low level libgcm library), the PlayStation 3 also includes several features of OpenGL ES 2.0

So what say now?

ico said:
You are talking about pre-OpenGL era here. Game development was done directly to the hardware at that time. DirectX doesn't get any sort of credit for that. OpenGL came before as an API.

Direct3D only started to get popular from (and after) version 9 and only due to Microsoft's FUD. Heck, OpenGL was better and faster compared to it. Just compare the graphics of Doom 3 with Half-life 2.

I absolutely agree buddy. :smile:

vickybat said:
The graphics API for the PS3 is called OpenGL ES 2.0 (short for Embedded System) which is a subset of OpenGL 2.0. OpenGL is an open standard defined and promoted by the Khronos group. It is also of note that while the RSX should be DirectX9 compliant the PS3 will not use DirectX for it's games as DirectX is not a native API of the Linux enviroment which the PS3 uses.

Check this for more info. Now you know what i am talking about and why linux should be the chosen platform if such things ever becomes a reality. There's no significant loss of integrity here.

I am being realistic. Don't expect sony to win battles straight away with this move but put a halt to microsoft's monopoly if not a "screeching halt".

Nothing is easy but making slow but significant moves assures a certain victory although its gonna be time consuming. Sure the task here is insurmountable & even the idea is a bit far fetched, its not by a great degree.
.

Okay. Please.. don't move in circles and make the same point again and again. Open GL ES is not platform exclusive. It is used in varied type of embded systems, including PS3. But PS3 is not using out of the box API here. They are putting the API though lot of changes making sure that it talks directly to the PS3 hardware. So, things will not be the same with PC hardware. Visual and performance fidelity that they have achieved with their games will not be possible that easily. Lot of time, man and money are required.

Excellent posts Vickybat.

Ok, for all D3D bashers out there, please read this:

Carmack: Direct3D is now better than OpenGL | bit-gamer.net

I would take his word for it

vamsi_krishna said:
Okay. Please.. don't move in circles and make the same point again and again. Open GL ES is not platform exclusive. It is used in varied type of embded systems, including PS3. But PS3 is not using out of the box API here. They are putting the API though lot of changes making sure that it talks directly to the PS3 hardware. So, things will be the same with PC hardware. Visual and performance fidelity that they have achieved with their games will not be possible that easily. Lot of time, man and money are required.

There is simply one point in this whole discussion and that is support of open-gl in more and more platforms and specifically for pc.

I never said open-gl ES is a platform exclusive. Open standards are never exclusive to a particular platform and i very well know that.

And i agree that it won't be easy and definitely man and money power and required. Do you know Rage uses opengl for pc & ps3 but directX for xbox 360.

If developers can port that successfully without considerable loss in performance and fidelity ( Rage in xbox 360 look beautiful) , then why do you think its unachievevable in the context of this discussion.

Sure developers can port the game to pc and use open-gl. Its not that difficult for them as you think.

Liverpool_fan said:
Excellent posts Vickybat.

Thanks buddy. :smile:

Sorry.. every game will be ported to multiple APIs these days not just rage. Rembmer?

Every game will be ported to PS3 which uses OpenGL. Thats why most multiplatform games performs like sheet on this machine. Lack of polish.

rchi84 said:
Ok, for all D3D bashers out there, please read this:

Carmack: Direct3D is now better than OpenGL | bit-gamer.net

I would take his word for it

has anyone even bashed D3D?

yup, after 10 years of spreading FUD and pumping $$$ you are bound to make your product good and may be better. OpenGL can still do whatever D3D can.

comp@ddict said:
Haha thats a shame then.

High sales = More money from consoles

Which leaves Devs wary of spending TIME and RESOURCES and EFFORT to make the game any better, or optimized at all for the PC.

Is that hard to grasp?

Actually Yes.

What you are speaking does not really make sense. It sounds right, but it is not. Just because a certain device is selling well, it is not the sole reason that development/support for a complimentary device will cease.

What is stopping the game studios to develop and harness the > Dx9 capabilities to the full potential and creating code from scratch. How can we even say that they are so called "porting". Any one from a game studio here...? They are just being plain and simple lazy and not using what is out there for them to use. Why..? Cause they have us believing that consoles are holding back PC games, since consoles run on out dated hardware. If a company really wants to put effort in creating something right they sure can. See Crysis 2. It was done straight up in Dx9 and put most Dx11 touted games to shame. Why..? The company spent the time and effort to do it. I am sure Crytek know what a PS3 and XBOX360 are.

Also anyone who says that the game was just "ported" or reverse engineered to the PC. Probably has not seen object code or been through a product development cycle right till end-of-life. It does not work like this. Either they announce that production will cease on this day and date, but you do not create shoddy half baked products and continue to retail them, on the pretext that a competing product of ours is doing "better". It would be the worst business logic I have heard.

It takes just as much effort to pick up a platform specific code, re-use, re-compile and MODIFY for another variant(hardware). It is just not a copy paste and run, which most people speak about porting. There is umpteen testing and case scenarios. I am quite sure they are writing fresh code for PC games, but just not doing it optimally. PS3 sales have got jack to do with this though. The studios are choosing to write the games the way we see them on PC cause they choose too. It is no market dynamics. Effort is almost just the same.

vickybat said:
They don't need to come up with their own operating system.
They don't need tons of money either to promote development on linux like micosoft.

Since the underlying api's are so similar, porting won't be a problem. Linux is an "open platfom" unlike microsoft. So sony won't have to pay any sort of "royalty" to anyone unlike developers paying to microsoft.

Its not some ordeal to simply pull off but expand in terms of providing content & simultaneosly do battle. Good for both console and pc gamers imo.
Sure SCE was in losses but look at them now. They have redefined gaming in many ways. They can do it for linux too and back opengl in the same process.

Good for the future of gaming.

Sony PS3 had Linux when it was launched. One of the FWs disabled it. Why..? Sony was not to happy, about other usages of the PS3. People were using it for super computing on the Linux layer. They are no charity or NGO. They want business and money. They will only sink investment in places which give ROI or promise positive revenue down the line.

Though are you really sure, the APIs were same for Linux and DirectX. Doubt it. Cause both are abstraction layers between hardware and OS. Hardware is same, but OS varies quite a bit...!

cyborg47 said:
I understand. Microsoft has Windows, and you want sony to have linux.
But why the hell would sony even want to go to Linux in the first place?!
They're not doing some kinda social service in the gaming industry here lol.
What you're saying is perfectly possible, sony can fall in love with linux and pull it up yes.

They removed Linux as I mentioned above.

IMO.. there should not be a monopoly in any kind of thing.

Compition will make consumers king. Monopoly will make the company rich.

DX what is now.. would have been 10times better if OpenGL had clicked in the market.

asingh said:
Sony PS3 had Linux when it was launched. One of the FWs disabled it. Why..? Sony was not to happy, about other usages of the PS3. People were using it for super computing on the Linux layer. They are no charity or NGO. They want business and money. They will only sink investment in places which give ROI or promise positive revenue down the line.

The reason why It wasn't there on Slim.

"I’m sorry that you are frustrated by the lack of comment specifically regarding the withdrawal of support for OtherOS on the new PS3 slim. The reasons are simple: The PS3 Slim is a major cost reduction involving many changes to hardware components in the PS3 design. In order to offer the OtherOS install, SCE would need to continue to maintain the OtherOS hypervisor drivers for any significant hardware changes – this costs SCE. One of our key objectives with the new model is to pass on cost savings to the consumer with a lower retail price. Unfortunately in this case the cost of OtherOS install did not fit with the wider objective to offer a lower cost PS3."

The reason to remove it from other PS3s with firmware upgrade is, Geohot. In a BBC interview he stated that the looted the master key through the "Other OS" option in linux.

And talking about charity.. PS3 funded to a Linux distro for 2 years. Also, Using networked ps3's computing power to study proteins in conjunction with standford university's research on cure for cancer. And plenty more which were unofficial.

asingh said:
Though are you really sure, the APIs were same for Linux and DirectX. Doubt it. Cause both are abstraction layers between hardware and OS. Hardware is same, but OS varies quite a bit...!
.

I didn't get you buddy. Linux is an os and directX is a set of api's. So what exactly do you mean by saying "api's are same"?

^
Sorry meant API call on m$ vs. linux.

asingh said:
This is the biggest misconception which the gaming community is living in. Why is it the fault of consoles. Why cannot not the developers right code which is specific to all the platforms. It is because game studios are lazy OR the finance houses are pushy that reverse porting happens and we see the wonders off consolization to the PC game. What is stopping them from creating a Dx11 build and a separate build for the console hardware. The hardware is moving quicker than the gaming studios -- for whom it is created in the first place.

Because console games sale more, and a lot, I mean how many play pc games? Many think its hard to install games etc, once my friend bought a game and couldn't install it(cause a virus was blocking access to registry), so he blamed it on pc(not his carelessness), like this many buy console games because its easy to play. 90% of my friends have virus in their pc, and a lot get fooled by shopkeepers into buying old gpu and try to play games on it.
A kid in my block bought a 6200LE for 4k a few weeks ago, tried to play Just Cause 2 on it, guess what happened.

Also developing for consoles is a lot easier, fixed hardware, fixed api, no need to test and deploy in multiple hardware config, perhaps the greatest strength and also the greatest weakness in consoles. Also for same reason console games have higher margins due to minimum development time compared to pc.

ico said:
Interesting reads:
Why you should use OpenGL and not DirectX - Wolfire Games Blog
DirectX vs. OpenGL revisited - Wolfire Games Blog

Good article, but john carmack is one to talk, for how long his IDtech4 has been in development? Now compare Brink vs Crysis 2 visuals, I'll believe it when rage actually comes and proves this.

@ asingh

Yes api call is very much different between windows and linux. But we are only concerned with the multimedia api's i.e directx and opengl.

Windows supports both whereas linux supports opengl only and the graphics library is called Mesa3D. It's an Open Source library which follows the OpenGL API.

But micro$soft isn't touting on opengl and is forcing developers to use directX as the default choice.

^^
And what do all the three platforms use..?

asingh said:
^^
And what do all the three platforms use..?

You mean ps3 , 360 and windows?

^^

Mmmm..ya.

^^ Well ps3 uses opengl ES 1.0 ( ES = embedded systems), PSGL which is based on opengl and nvidia's CG.

Xbox 360 uses custom API based on directX. XNA is the IDE.

Windows uses both directX and opengl while the latter has terrible support.

tkin said:
Good article, but john carmack is one to talk, for how long his IDtech4 has been in development? Now compare Brink vs Crysis 2 visuals, I'll believe it when rage actually comes and proves this.

haha, you'll be surprised to know that id Tech 4 was released way back when Doom 3 came. Rage = id Tech 5.

tbf, I don't need pseudogamedevs aka gamers to believe. Carmack is level-headed, downplayed D3D when it was ridiculous and now accepts it is good when it has become good.

"Crysis 2...omfg DX9 onlehhhh???" - these are posts which gave me petty laughs actually. All depends on how you use the API. Not denying that newer APIs have more features but again it all depends on how you use them.

Why not compare Crysis DX9 to Crysis 2 DX11?

^^
That is the thing. Crytek really threw "the console sales" logic out the window. Just shows that PC game studios know exactly what they are doing. Lazy bummers.

Off to FEAR3 now.

vickybat said:
Windows uses both directX and opengl while the latter has terrible support.

What do you mean by "support"? If by that you mean poorer performace of gl in Windows, then I think Microsoft have put you into myth like so many million others.
This is from the article ico linked:

Microsoft initiated a fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) campaign against OpenGL around the release of Windows Vista. In 2003, Microsoft left the OpenGL Architecture Review Board -- showing that they no longer had any interest in the future of OpenGL. Then in 2005, they gave presentations at SIGGRAPH (special interest group for graphics) and WinHEC (Windows Hardware Engineering Conference) giving the impression that Windows Vista would remove support for OpenGL except to maintain back-compatibility with XP applications. This version of OpenGL would be layered on top of DirectX as shown here, (from the HEC presentation) causing a dramatic performance hit. This campaign led to panic in the OpenGL community, leading many professional graphics programmers to switch to DirectX.

When Vista was released, it backpedaled on its OpenGL claims, allowing vendors to create fast installable client drivers (ICDs) that restore native OpenGL support. The OpenGL board sent out newsletters proving that OpenGL is still a first-class citizen, and that OpenGL performance on Vista was still at least as fast as Direct3D. Unfortunately for OpenGL, the damage had already been done -- public confidence in OpenGL was badly shaken.

Liverpool_fan said:
What do you mean by "support"? If by that you mean poorer performace of gl in Windows, then I think Microsoft have put you into myth like so many million others.
This is from the article ico linked:

No , no don't get me wrong. I didn't mean opengl doesn't perform well in windows. Cmon man i have seen rage and it looks fantastic. I am an ardent open-gl supporter.
What i meant was microsoft forcing developers to support directX and not open-gl which is bad imo.

That's why i was saying about sony to support linux platform to develop using open-gl and end micro$soft's monopoly.
I had read that article and totally support it.

OK. You are totally correct.

I honestly don't blame MS, they are a corporation, they'll try to shove their proprietary standards on everyone, other companies are prone to that as well like Apple (iTunes, lock ins, etc.), and NVIDIA (CUDA, PhysX). Sad really. (Though CUDA, PhysX are cross platform, and personally I don't mind them).

I also happen to agree with you that it should be natural for Sony to push gaming in Linux (and Mac OS X), and this deadly combination of these Operating Systems with their console will be brilliant for gaming. But sadly that won't happen

^^ Yup very true and i too want the same. But who knows , it might just become a reality one day.

Since games are going multiplat, sony might see linux as a unanimous platform choice.

asingh said:
^^
That is the thing. Crytek really threw "the console sales" logic out the window. Just shows that PC game studios know exactly what they are doing. Lazy bummers.

Off to FEAR3 now.

Graphics are worse than FEAR 1, its just soo bad, why did they go back?

What you are speaking does not really make sense. It sounds right, but it is not. Just because a certain device is selling well, it is not the sole reason that development/support for a complimentary device will cease.

What is stopping the game studios to develop and harness the > Dx9 capabilities to the full potential and creating code from scratch. How can we even say that they are so called "porting". Any one from a game studio here...? They are just being plain and simple lazy and not using what is out there for them to use. Why..? Cause they have us believing that consoles are holding back PC games, since consoles run on out dated hardware.

Why don't you just agree to the financial stuff I was blabbing about, cuz at the end of the day, we know that's the main reason. MONEY.

MONEY MONEY MONEY!

The only problem we Pc gamers face is that the latest and best hardware costs too much $$$$

Pc gamers have to meet game requirements whereas the games meet consoles requirement :wink:

vickybat said:
^^ Yup very true and i too want the same. But who knows , it might just become a reality one day.

Since games are going multiplat, sony might see linux as a unanimous platform choice.

As I said before, will only happen in dreams. If, sony wants to put a fight.. they have better options than this.

And, about visual differences. Please note that it is not just OpenGL or DX. Its the talent who are working on the game, the time they have got, the resources they have got.

tkin said:
Graphics are worse than FEAR 1, its just soo bad, why did they go back?

I did not mean that. See Cry2. Done just on DX9, it looks better than most Dx10 games. I am sure if you blind folded a player upon launch, then showed him the screen he would not be able to see a difference. FEAR had way way worse graphics. Hardly textures and any dynamic metrics.

comp@ddict said:
Why don't you just agree to the financial stuff I was blabbing about, cuz at the end of the day, we know that's the main reason. MONEY.

MONEY MONEY MONEY!

Comp@Addict, till you can show me substantial proof of your theory (not some forum junkies replying or speculative blogs) I can hold on to my views and debate. If you believe it is the money factor that actually PC games are coming out "bad", good for you. Also do not show me a pie chart which shows the sales break up of console vs. PC. That in inconclusive and fragments do not lead to such large conspiracy theories.

I believe else wise and gave my views. Not asking you to believe it. Rubbing it in does not always work. Thanks.

@thetechfreak I would have agreed with you till about 2 generations of Video cards ago. But the fact is, anyone with a Core2 Quad Q6600, 8800GT with 4GB Ram can still play most games out today at mid-high details levels, on 720p atleast.

There are very few games that push hardware, because publishers have realized that bleeding edge graphics don't sell more copies. The best selling games are still light on hardware requirements. E.g. COD series, The Sims, World of Warcraft, EA's sports franchises etc..

Because console development is still the Lowest denominator for base level performance, the minimum requirements for running most games is still very light on the pocket.

comp@ddict said:
Why don't you just agree to the financial stuff I was blabbing about, cuz at the end of the day, we know that's the main reason. MONEY.

MONEY MONEY MONEY!

Why is that a bad thing for the consumer though? Or for the games developer?

Would you rather have a thriving games industry where developers and publishers can make money (and remember, AAA game production costs almost as much as movies these days) or be in a situation where they lose money and more studios fold up, which would eventually kill off the video gaming industry?

No, games won't die. They will move onto the Facebook/Mobile platforms, which are more attractive than consoles are.. That's the nightmare facing us a decade from now

rchi84 said:
@thetechfreak I would have agreed
with you till about 2 generations of
Video cards ago. But the fact is,
anyone with a Core2 Quad Q6600,
8800GT with 4GB Ram can still play
most games out today at mid-high details levels, on 720p atleast

The 8800 is a good card. Its only Dx10 and Dx11 is already out. No it will hant and pant in a newes game at 720p
Even my 9500Gt struggles in a few games with everything maxed out at 720p.

The Ps3 with arguably best hardware among other consoles has Gpu equivalent to 7800 so you should get the idea how outdated the Gpu is.

rchi84 said:
The best selling
games are still light on hardware
requirements. E.g. COD series

Sims may be light on hardware. Call of Duty isnt exactly light. Black Ops is a very processor intensive and not a very well optimised game for Pc. Black Ops COMPLETELY failed to run in my previous Celeron rig.
The reason why the Ps3 can run these games is not because of the 7800 gpu. But because of the 8 core Cell processor.

That in inconclusive and fragments do not lead to such large conspiracy theories.

conspiracies?

Bro stop watching TV, it's harming you. You mean to say console sales outnumber PC sales 10 to 1 isn't a big factor? You mean to say it's nothing?

Oh wait, it's no point quarelling with you, because you won't agree. So i rest my case with you. Your opinions and my opinions separate.

---------------------------------------

Game Devs won't spend time on PC to optimize it, or make better quality textures, or squeeze the last out of the PC (you may have heard several times, this game that game pushing console to the limits but never that for PC, for PC it's a benchmark of poor optimization).

Why do you think that happens? Well, Devs simply don't want to spend on polishing the game to take advantage of high-end PC hardware, simply because their time and effort won't pay off with sales figures.

If the DEVS don't want excessive money fine, but you have to agree here, the Publisher, all they care about is money (activision anyone?), and if the game won't sell well, the DEVS get hit, if the game doesn't profit much, the DEVs lose their jobs, studio shut down, end of their dreams.

So, DEVs in a way have no option but to continue making games on console and then bringing it to PC for the extra sales.

This is very very opposite to what Battlefield 3 (god bless DICE) is, it's being developed on PC, with maxed out stuff, and then being "scaled down" to fit on consoles. And EA has played it out well, the sentiments of PC gamers, especially after Crysis 2 and all, EA hit the nail with Battlefield 3, and it speaks for itself, pre-orders of BF3 are wayy ahead of MW3, and it's no surprises to guess which of the 2 end up with more PC sales (more total sales across platforms for that matter might be in question too!).

Would you rather have a thriving games industry where developers and publishers can make money (and remember, AAA game production costs almost as much as movies these days) or be in a situation where they lose money and more studios fold up, which would eventually kill off the video gaming industry?

Thats what I meant, they are developing for consoles for money reasons, and that's something I am blaring my foghorn to make you all agree to, but some people wont.

They will move onto the Facebook/Mobile platforms, which are more attractive than consoles are..

:nightmare:

Well, the next nightmare will be Free-2-Play games, with their sole objective being to sell us 0.99$ items (much like today's major Mobile OSes)

Why is that a bad thing for the consumer though?

See topic of debate, consoles reason behind PC potential not being used in games

The only problem we Pc gamers face is that the latest and best hardware costs too much $$$$

Pc gamers have to meet game requirements whereas the games meet consoles requirement

yeah it is never pleasant to hear a developer proudly proclaim that their game will look the same across all platforms.

And what do we get, POOR performance, despite splurging on our hardware. True we play at 1920x1080, but our hardware is manifold stronger too ain't it.

@thetechfreak You played Black Ops on a Celeron? I am going to report you to Maneka Gandhi, for cruelty lol.

I never said that the 8800GT will max out games yaar. I said it can run them fine at mid to high levels at 720p, which will still look better than the consoles. and the DX 10/11 thing, imho, isn't as easy to point out the differences than it was with 9.0b and 9.0c.

Look at it from another angle. Because devs don't focus on pushing hardware, PC gaming is as affordable as consoles are these days. esp if you factor in the cheaper prices for PC games, in the long run, your investment in PC+games will work out to be far cheaper than Console+games.

@comp@addict I used to believe that PC sales were much worse than consoles too, but I read an interview with Gabe Newell, who said that the problem is, no one ever asks Valve or D2D about the number of digital sales they've made. They still track physical copies moved, which I think the more advanced markets in America, Europe and Far East Asia have long come out of.

Revenue wise, WoW is still leaps and bounds ahead of the next competitor, so I think the PC is a viable platform still.

The problem is, the most common GPU out there is still Intel sh**$y onboard chips. that's what holding PC gaming back..

vamsi_krishna said:
As I said before, will only happen in dreams. If, sony wants to put a fight.. they have better options than this.

And, about visual differences. Please note that it is not just OpenGL or DX. Its the talent who are working on the game, the time they have got, the resources they have got.

Dreams do become true sometimes and its not at all unrealistic to speculate.
You are not again getting the point. The whole point of this discussion wasn't about dx or open-gl being superior or something but more developers accepting open-gl as an alternate.

Open-gl can do everything that dx can and i was just speculating on a fact that might revive open-gl. Now i don't know it might happen or not and yes it might never happen.
But it was simply just how i thought about the solution. Offcourse you're right about the fact that game developement requires hardwork and talent to make a difference is visual fidelity and gameplay.

I never denied that did i? But i just thought of a way that might help open-gl development and thats all mate. :smile:

@ comp@ddict

Yes i somewhat agree with you. You do have a point. Publishing on consoles does make money. Games are going multiplatform for this very reason and third party developers are
developing for all the platforms rather than exclusively developing for one. There is only one reason behind this and that is to make more money.
Lets hope battlefield 3 changes this scenario forever. Only the sales will determine the final outcome.

rchi84 said:
@thetechfreak You played Black Ops on a Celeron? I am going to report you to Maneka Gandhi, for cruelty lol.

I got almost everygame running in my Celeron. Even Crysis 2 at low resolution and gamer graphics gave me 30 FPS and I finished it

GTA IV at low Res with low settings game me 20 FPS. I even finished it at this res.

rchi84 said:
Look at it from another angle. Because devs don't focus on pushing hardware, PC gaming is as affordable as consoles are these days. esp if you factor in the cheaper prices for PC games, in the long run, your investment in PC+games will work out to be far cheaper than Console+games.

This I agree with you 100%

vickybat said:
Open-gl can do everything that dx can and i was just speculating on a fact that might revive open-gl. Now i don't know it might happen or not and yes it might never happen.

It would be great if it happened. But it wont happen anytime soon

The problem is, the most common GPU out there is still Intel sh**$y onboard chips. that's what holding PC gaming back..

Haha, hopefully it will become APUs in some time now. That would change a lot.

@ comp@ddict

Yes i somewhat agree with you. You do have a point. Publishing on consoles does make money. Games are going multiplatform for this very reason and third party developers are
developing for all the platforms rather than exclusively developing for one. There is only one reason behind this and that is to make more money.
Lets hope battlefield 3 changes this scenario forever. Only the sales will determine the final outcome.

Battlefield 3 FTW, hope EA doesn't screw it up..

comp@ddict said:
conspiracies?

Bro stop watching TV, it's harming you. You mean to say console sales outnumber PC sales 10 to 1 isn't a big factor? You mean to say it's nothing?

Oh wait, it's no point quarelling with you, because you won't agree. So i rest my case with you. Your opinions and my opinions separate.

Why are you picking a fragment of a paragraph and changing the context of what I have said...?

By conspiracy theory I meant, that game studios use sales figure as a deciding factor, not about the 10 : 1 ratio.

Till anyone in this debate can prove that it saves money for developers to back port limited features for PC code, I will not agree to the theory. Or any one who has worked on multi-platform scalar projects and can concur the same. As I mentioned before, it is not that "easy", as we all mention. A lot of effort and programming logic is applied when creating multi-platform code. Are we even sure, they are writing same code. It is not that simple. Any from a game studio here.

There are various other reasons why PC games come out as they are. People who say that consoles are reaching the limit, should read Sony's official statement about the PS3 being only tapped half. Why have they not released a refresh. See how KZ3 uses the PS3, you will understand what console development is. PC have been pushed to the limit when developers chose too. Crysis/Warhead did that. Metro2033 did that.

And it is extremely open-ended to say PC's being pushed to the limit. There are far too many combination and permutations for game developers to "push to the limits". When a CoD BO can run just fine and do the "job" , why should stuff be put in there that will give you 35 FPS and screen crawl. That is the biggest stick up PC gamers. Instead of playing the shooter and enjoying the game, they rather look at water, smoke, and alt-tab to see how GPU usage Riva Tuner is showing.

The underlying question is. Why do we get games on PC the way we do. It is quite simple. The developers want to give us exactly that. Not based on sales figures of the console. They know better than us that the job will be done using what ever effort they put into it. You really think if all games came out like Crysis/Warhead/Metro, suddenly PC game sales will go up. Ya right...........! Or will it cause sales of consoles to come out. Nopes. The cause and affect combination is grossly incorrect here.

You know from where PC gamers start to think like this. Cause we are eating right out of the hands of ATI/nVidia/Intel/AMD. They keep developing hardware which is miles ahead of the game studios. The real creativity (for games, not hardware) and onus is with game studios. The ratio of code : other activities of game development is set by them and they will not tweak it. But hardware device vendors sell it to us, and then we blame the game studios. They are doing their job quite well.

Comp@ddict: my TV viewing is ~30 minutes a fortnight.
I have given you various argumentative debates in my replies, and not getting personal like you are. Hope we can keep it this way. You are just stuck on sales vs. quality. If there is anything else which you can provide to support this, or your experience working with code,sales, multi platform porting, product life cycles then please bring it to the table. It is quite easy to sit back and comment on a macro level without understanding the nuances of micro metrics.

@ comp@ddict

It somewhat gets difficult to understand whom you are quoting and whom you are not.

Also add the handle ID when you quote. Thanks.

The One thing that makes buying Gaming PC more sensible than a PS3 / Xbox360 [ Won;t mention Wii , Wii is a class of its own , no substitute ] , is something i cannot mention in this forum

vickybat said:
Dreams do become true sometimes and its not at all unrealistic to speculate.
You are not again getting the point. The whole point of this discussion wasn't about dx or open-gl being superior or something but more developers accepting open-gl as an alternate.

Yes. I would like to see that day too. But, I think, Sony is not the correct firm to do it. This has to first start from GPU vendors.

Also about dreams, yeah. No one knew Sony will be in console market before Sega denied Sony's optical devices in their Saturn.

asingh said:
You know from where PC gamers start
to think like this. Cause we are eating
right out of the hands of ATI/nVidia/
Intel/AMD. They keep developing
hardware which is miles ahead of the
game studios.

I cant agree with you more

The Difference between the various Direct x's are not earth moving(atleast I feel it)
We do have Tessalation etc but still...the leaps and bound Pc games were ahead is starting to reduce

Even the C2 Dx11 patch effect has dissapointed many. Gameranand also said what is the use of having a more realistic effect of shooting in Water? Hardly any enemies hide in it.
the visual experience I had from Crysis 2 Dx9.0c edition was a lot better than many Dx10 games around . The Dx 11 makes walls more realistic. I seldom hardly stare at walls in the game. Whats the use?

You are just stuck on sales vs. quality.

a perfect reason, which you won't agree to no matter what.

I wont say anything further.

As I said, I'm already out of this discussion and, asingh, with all due respect, I honor everybody's opinions and your's included. Just that, we have differing views here, agreed?

And my intention was nothing personal. It was a joke you didn't grasp. Don't give it another name.

~~If that was a personal attack, my effort would make a rookie laugh.~~

the visual experience I had from Crysis 2 Dx9.0c editionn was a lot better than many Dx10 games around . The Dx 11 makes walls more realistic. I seldom hardly stare at walls in the game. Whats the use?

So true, tessellation is more like a joke to me right now you know. The water finally reacts to bullets LOL, finally physics apply in-game. For a DX9.0c game, they have done well.
Might I add, the custom HD Textures by some (EDIT)MaLDo(thnx cyborg) or some guy gives a better boost to the game's look than anything else. Try it once.

comp@ddict said:
Might I add, the custom HD Textures by some Molago or some guy gives a better boost to the game's look than anything else. Try it once.

its MaLDo...MaLDo's high res tuexture pack for crysis 2..

Well actually the thing is we don't have a competition between DirectX and OpenGL. So the improvement is real slow IMO just like OS. MS don't have a competition so they spoon feed us and we take it.

asingh said:
You know from where PC gamers start
to think like this. Cause we are eating
right out of the hands of ATI/nVidia/
Intel/AMD. They keep developing
hardware which is miles ahead of the
game studios.

101% true. We are way ahead of consoles in terms of power yet we don't get that quality of visual. Why its simple hardware is progressing but DirectX and Open GL don't. They are stuck at where they are or the improvement is very slow. Developers don't give a damn to give us better visual because they want to make money which is right. They are not some kind of charity or something. If this has to change then we need competition like say in mobiles. Now mobiles are dirt cheap and their OS are improving because there is competition. In PC there is not.

We still don't know if consoles are more profitable than PCs or vice versa? (Atleast I don't)
But what we do know is it is more profitable to go multi platform. You might argue that it has always been so but it is only now that we are seeing the trend. Every game I have bought for my PS3 until now has a cousin in the PC. Barring a few exclusives, there is just a thin line between them all.

It saddening to see everyone getting into the core specifications of each and the benchmarks that different systems throw up. Remember the Wii outsold both the next gen consoles, for a lot many years, although being only slightly more powerful than the PS2. Even on the PC every visit to Zapak shows me everyone hooked to CS or Dota and a few Wow and NFS games. Not the best graphics but fun; yes, huge dollops of it. Its the games that matter in the end. Even the PS3 for all the power that it had was plagued with no good games for years. The cell processor was a heptacore 3Ghz(one locked core) monster in the baby dualcore days.

It is irrelevant whats inside the box, what matters is what you see and experience. DX9, 10, 11 doesn't matter. If you actually own a console and a PC you wont find much of a difference. But if you did that means you haven't been concentrating on playing.

I would like all of you to atleast see once, if not play, not on youtube but on a PS3 the game called "Heavy Rain". It is till date the most visually detailed game I have ever played.
I haven't played Red Dead Redemption; the horses of which seems to have eaten millions of $$ to get to achieve realistic detail. Nor have I tried L.A.Noire which seems to have a lot of detailing too. I would like someone to make a fair comparison of them or any other games out there in the wild which come close or better these.

I just read the whole Piracy article on Tweakguide. It truly is an eye opener. Without any fear of getting caught everyone becomes a pirate.

BTW: LA Noire is coming to PC, looks like one less console exclusive to go.

Sarath said:
It is irrelevant whats inside the box, what matters is what you see and experience. DX9, 10, 11 doesn't matter. If you actually own a console and a PC you wont find much of a difference. But if you did that means you haven't been concentrating on playing.

I disagree. While its true the DX level doesnt matter, image quality counts.

Dont tell me that on Crysis 2 or metro 2033 you wont notice a difference when playing DX9 and DX11 one by one.

Even the casual eye will notice some changes.

This is what separates enthusiasts and hardcore gamers from the console and casual gamer crowd.

While many games don't show much change from console to PC, it is because the game is made for console first and then ported to PC >.<

Play Just Cause 2, a fairly lighter game. Many of its assets were built from scratch on PC. There is a significant variation between the console and PC version.

Game developers have become lazy. That is why we do not see progress.

But I think it would be fairly easier for them to port from PC to console, after all the game is made on PCs. Not to mention the promotional pictures that are shown, which contain much higher detailed assets than the actual game.I am not referring to in-game screenshots.

in case you didnt know, I own both an enthusiast PC and a PS3.

@Extreme gamer: Have you read this article:
TweakGuides.com - PC Game Piracy Examined

I recommend that everyone who is participating in the discussion in this thread just has to read this article. It is difficult to find such excellent quality, unbiased piece on this subject.

Thankee for the link but I dont bother to discuss piracy.
More oft than not it leads to flame wars.

But i still think everyone here should read this article. If you read it you will understand why I brought up piracy in this.

baccilus said:
@Extreme gamer: Have you read this article:
TweakGuides.com - PC Game Piracy Examined

I recommend that everyone who is participating in the discussion in this thread just has to read this article. It is difficult to find such excellent quality, unbiased piece on this subject.

Good article. Thanks.

You read it? Great. It took me an hour to read the full article.

Got an interesting read:

This Is Why PC Will Always Be Ahead Of Consoles

Discussing piracy will dissolve all other topics here.

At the time of writing, most of the gaming platforms have been exploited i.e. their DRM cracked/ copy protection voided. Easiest of all PC, then Xbox 360, Wii (no idea)I heard they use propriety disks(?) and the relatively recent exploit of the PS3. All this means that the end user (pirate) pays only for the gaming system. So even on this ground they all stand equal for comparison.

Don't know when my next post will be so saying it now(again); Both of them are awesome!

PC will always remain a top dog.

Read it guys. :smile:

^^ Nice article

Another interesting read:

Why Consoles Have Succeeded Over PCs in Gaming << Gaming Irresponsibly Â» Gaming Irresponsibly

Lovely thread, too bad I'm 3 months late into this.

1) Game-ability - Console FTW!

Consoles shine over PC's if you are a hardcore gamer and nothing else. You need hassle free hardware, and games you can just plonk into it and expect them to work. But these kind of gamers are usually the filthy rich of the extremely hardcore ones, and many often buy different consoles all together (X360 and PS3) to be able to play the complete set of games. On a VFM basis, consoles tend to loose out if you intend to buy lots and lots of games, but they give you an experience of the way the game is meant to be played. Oh and I never mentioned the Wii because its in a category of its own. Its best left to family gatherings to entertain middle aged aunties and their pesky little kids.

2) Value For Money - PC FTW!

This is often stated as THE point when it comes to buying PCs for gaming, but from what I've gathered, PCs are NOT VFM at all if you buy them for exclusively gaming and nothing else (read: give them the console treatment). I know people who do everything computational with their office laptops and have decided to buy a PC for only gaming. This sort of a situation, they need to shell out 70-80 grands for a nice setup including a huge TV for use as a monitor.

But I bet 90% of people do not fall in the above category. We buy PCs for not just gaming but for a lot of other things as well. Even when a PC is too old to be able to play any games, its still usable for office work and other stuff. Many people use PCs for other non-gaming power computing tasks, like multimedia encoding or graphical design. A brand new gaming rig can easily last for 5-7 years this way with small incremental hardware upgrades (maybe RAID0 HDD setup or extra and/or faster memory and a cooler to OC). And more often than not, people buy a TV for use as a TV as well. You needn't add its cost to the gaming rig and even if you do, it doesn't hurt that much in the long run as its got a rather excellent life.

Finally the price of games. Just go to flipkart or letsbuy. You'll see plenty of games available for under 1k and many even under Rs. 500. Agreed that some are older titles but at the end of the day what matters is how awesome the game plays. Graphics are not the only thing. At such low prices with such awesome games and as many people said, the keyboard macro capability, VFM is maximum for PCs even if you buy games. And there are so many trials available for games. Good enough to provide single friday night entertainment.

3) For the Vendors - Consoles FTW!

Finally comes the vendor factor. Its kinda obvious that vendors find consoles highly favourable. Lot higher profit margins from the games. And very hard to pirate, and pirating blocks out online gaming which is where most console games are focussed on in the first place. Most gaming hardware is actually sold at a highly subsidised rate. Often its 20-30% below the manufacturing cost. This is because the cost is swiftly recovered through sales of games.

In comparison, despite there being a lot many PC gamers compared to console gamers, its the worst investment financially. Majority of PC gamers don't buy the games. This ends up in loss making figures for the industry because those who do pay much less compared to their console gaming peers. If everyone paid for games, PC gaming industry would've overtaken console gaming industry in terms of profitability due to numbers (less margin lot more sales). But today, consoles stand to rule.

The end effect of all this is that Vendors have started pushing out more and more console exclusive titles. But at the end of the day, the desperate gamer who can afford it gets any and every hardware he needs to run his dream game. The one who cannot afford it either finds *another means* or is doomed and needs a more affordable hobby.

+1
Nicely summerised article MHG.

^^ I totally missed that. I guess thats what my article is in fewer words

BTW a console costs 20k and lasts 10years (I know thats too much, but with overlapping of generations also its a whole 5 years)
Each game costs 1500 2500 or 3500 bucks.

PC costs anything between 50k to 100k and last as long as the hardware ahead is not exponentially faster than the previous gen.
Each game costs: (with honesty) Nothing
If you pay its 500-1200(max)

As a result, more developers are shifting to the consoles. I am yet to see someone with both PS3 and an Xbox but I seldom see console gamers shifting to PCs and vice versa.

Oh and btw what I said was with respect to India.

Seems outside India games cost similar for both PC and Consoles. And percentage of console gamers is a lot higher than it is here. Finding a gaming console in an average US household you have about as much chance as finding a pothole in an Indian road. This is yet another reason why outside India consoles rule the world. Oh and there its not that big an investment to buy both a PS3 and an XB360 as in India.

@ sarath
we have some members owning both consoles.

Even outside Indian the console games are priced higher than PC. Its just that luckily for us the PC games prices are adjusted. The same hasn't been done for Console games which widens the price gap between them.
The most expensive PC game I saw on retail was StarCraft 2 for 3.5k

@gameranand: I was refering to the "real" world. I am sure there are people who own every form of gaming hardware.
Most of my friend have PS3 but recently the "kinect" has started gaining favour however mearge the number of titles for it are.

N

@ sarath : Are you a student or doing some job ? i have read your post and that amount is way too much to spent on gaming

if we have LCD monitor can we use this for act as normal TV...?

BTW .. is multi monitor gaming possible is Consoles..??

Eyefinity can do 6 screen :d

Sarath said:
^^ I totally missed that. I guess thats what my article is in fewer words

BTW a console costs 20k and lasts 10years (I know thats too much, but with overlapping of generations also its a whole 5 years)
Each game costs 1500 2500 or 3500 bucks.

PC costs anything between 50k to 100k and last as long as the hardware ahead is not exponentially faster than the previous gen.
Each game costs: (with honesty) Nothing
If you pay its 500-1200(max)

As a result, more developers are shifting to the consoles. I am yet to see someone with both PS3 and an Xbox but I seldom see console gamers shifting to PCs and vice versa.

i own both the (major) consoles, as well as a 'gaming' PC, and keep shuffling between consoles and the PC randomly, much more due to confusion than due to choice :???:

(for eg, i started BF3 on PC, shifted midway to X360 due to a glitch on PC version, finally got the solution to it, but still continued to play on the X360, finally finishing it on the console, and now due to play 'karkand' expansion pack on the PC that i got for free with the DVD, but only after re-playing from where i had left it on the PC to shift to the console. all this while, am, as always, supremely confused as to among the hopelessly long list of old and new games that are pending to be touched, which title to start with next, and on what platform - the PS3, the X360, or the PC ?! wow ! what a mess ! :blink:

)

so you see, its not actually easy to decide which wall to bang your head on, without going bonkers first :wink:

No use arguing over this.
PC is the ultimate champion.

Sujeet said:
No use arguing over this.
PC is the ultimate champion.

Since both PC and Consoles are on market and have been for generations now, one thing is obvious, neither the PC nor the console has beaten the other, at least for now.

noob said:
@ sarath : Are you a student or doing some job ? i have read your post and that amount is way too much to spent on gaming

Long time due but I'm a student and gaming is really very expensive for me. Parents never buy me games so it's all out of my pocket, a small pocket i.e.

GhorMaanas said:
so you see, its not actually easy to decide which wall to bang your head on, without going bonkers first

Same here, I find both the console and PC to fit cozily side by side. This generation the PC and consoles are overlapping a lot causing a lot of confusion.
Eg: Crysis 2, should I get it on the PC or the PS3? But Crysis was PC exclusive so it was a no brainer.

Sarath said:
Since both PC and Consoles are on market and have been for generations now, one thing is obvious, neither the PC nor the console has beaten the other, at least .

First of all Current gen Pc hardware is years ahead of dating ps3 /x360 which strives to get even games with medicore visual running at max 30 fps at 720p. Only a handful of console exclusive games see the light of 1080p visuals and that too...upscaled.

For every multiplatform game available for both consoles and pc...pc always leads in performance and visuals....the.Total content available for pc is compartively larger than consoles(wont deny.console catalogue is quite large too and most modern games receive console release.)

Pc gets genuine love hardcore gamers and indie devs. lPc has the esential goodness of indie games.

Play NFS The RUN on PC, no 30FPS cap.

Like a boss.
*4.bp.blogspot.com/_2fdwS3Y1VhU/TSzZcGzZ7fI/AAAAAAAAqTI/ZWOPPrFzElk/s1600/like_a_boss_28.jpg

Sujeet said:
Total content available for pc is compartively larger than consoles(wont deny.console catalogue is quite large too and most modern games receive console release.)

"Total content available for pc is compartively larger than consoles(wont deny" i agree pc's can get MODS once game engines are released.something what consoles dont have

Sujeet said:
First of all Current gen Pc hardware is years ahead of dating ps3 /x360 which strives to get even games with medicore visual running at max 30 fps at 720p. Only a handful of console exclusive games see the light of 1080p visuals and that too...upscaled.

Gaming is not about the best hardware only. Same can be seen in how a Xbox 360 still sells more than the PS3 which has better hardware comparatively.

BTW Which is better has been argued over the many pages in this thread, I will refrain from it so.

To end it I would say, get both

PC and console.

tkin said:
Play NFS The RUN on PC, no 30FPS cap.

I didn't realise there was a cap on frame rate on the PS3. Will have to replay again :mrgreen:

tkin said:
Play NFS The RUN on PC, no 30FPS cap.

Like a boss.
*4.bp.blogspot.com/_2fdwS3Y1VhU/TSzZcGzZ7fI/AAAAAAAAqTI/ZWOPPrFzElk/s1600/like_a_boss_28.jpg

lol.nfs run was not even worth playing..sick most wanted clone...ea tried to brinvg back most wanted exp and fell on their face.
Btw it runs on frostbite 2.0 and there is no explanation reqd. for what its capable of as can be seen in bf3 ...there 30fps cap must have been a design choice not hardware or software limitation unlike consoles.

One thing has to be said people who own a PS3 or Xbox 360 way back from 2008 are biggest benificaries. They could games to run without any change. While we PC gamers have had to move from Nvidia 8800 to the New ati 7000 series. We install uninstall so many softwares just to get few extra FPS in Battlefield 3. While consolers just made a one time investment and are still going strong. The soon to come Gta 5 will set new boundaries in minimum requirements(considering what Gta 4 needed)
the same old consoles from 2008 will run the game perfect while a pc from that time will.... :facepalm:

Well thats because new games are downgraded to run on consoles but are not downgraded for pc because companies want their new hardware to sell

techbulb said:
Well thats because new games are downgraded to run on consoles but are not downgraded for pc because companies want their new hardware to sell

Heard of Crysis 2....???

Sujeet said:
Heard of Crysis 2....???

Apparently he hasnt

CryEngine has really been optimised very well for PC. they are one of few publishers that actually probably have concern for PC.
Other devs while porting to PC go :duh:

thetechfreak said:
Apparently he hasnt

CryEngine has really been optimised very well for PC. they are one of few publishers that actually probably have concern for PC.
Other devs while porting to PC go

Actually it was meant for PC Games in the beginning but later due to Crytek Entering Longterm Deal with EA And Need to showcase the visual prowess of Their Cryengine 3 they extended support to Consoles and later relased Crysis 2 with a visually watered down dx10 version To remove anamolies that may have crept in During Global Multi -Platform Release Of Crysis 2.

Sujeet said:
lol.nfs run was not even worth playing..sick most wanted clone...ea tried to brinvg back most wanted exp and fell on their face.
Btw it runs on frostbite 2.0 and there is no explanation reqd. for what its capable of as can be seen in bf3 ...there 30fps cap must have been a design choice not hardware or software limitation unlike consoles.

Run was not bad, don't compare it to MW, but compared to everything black box threw at us, carbon, pro street, undercover, run was good, I really enjoyed it, without the fps cap game ran like butter smooth, car handling was done properly(like arcade, but thats the point), also sound was pretty well done(I am sick of loud music playing in background, in run the ambient music was well done, also the environment sounds like thunder, blizzard and car engine sounds were done properly as well) and graphics was really good. Now the career mode is small and so is the choice of cars, but the game was really meant for mp.

tkin said:
Run was not bad, don't compare it to MW

EA/Blackbox tried it to make yet another MW type game so i said so.!

tkin said:
but compared to everything black box threw at us, carbon, pro street, undercover

EA Should end up their Contracts with Blackbox.Though blackbox belongs to EA!
They havent delivered even a single title which could live upto the Name Of NFS Series..always mediocre experience.

tkin said:
Now the career mode is small and so is the choice of cars, but the game was really meant for mp.

Agreed.
Career was damn small.
They wanted it to be a MP only.But average performance of Online Racer:Nfs World.which was free to play.. must have compelled EA to bundle The Run with single player just as an addon to boost sales...otherwise why would they have put up such a small single player mode.

pearls of wisdom from sarath

:

- Since both PC and Consoles are on market and have been for generations now, one thing is obvious, neither the PC nor the console has beaten the other, at least for now.

- Same here, I find both the console and PC to fit cozily side by side.

- To end it I would say, get both PC and console.

thetechfreak said:
One thing has to be said people who own a PS3 or Xbox 360 way back from 2008 are biggest benificaries. They could games to run without any change. While we PC gamers have had to move from Nvidia 8800 to the New ati 7000 series. We install uninstall so many softwares just to get few extra FPS in Battlefield 3. While consolers just made a one time investment and are still going strong. The soon to come Gta 5 will set new boundaries in minimum requirements(considering what Gta 4 needed)
the same old consoles from 2008 will run the game perfect while a pc from that time will....

cant refute it entirely (if you ignore the toned down/less-worked-upon look in a few console games, latest being BF3, which looked terrible on consoles as compared to its charming avatar on PC)

LOL Ghormanas...I hope you are not trolling me

techbulb said:
Well thats because new games are downgraded to run on consoles but are not downgraded for pc because companies want their new hardware to sell

that has been a problem lately. Downgrading of games or abysmal ports.

Sarath said:
LOL Ghormanas...I hope you are not trolling me

ofcourse not, since its true what you wrote! but i knew you would feel so :mrgreen:

the Real Reason why people here like PC
you get pirated games as easy as hell on a pc
New hardware and expensive console games are secondary reasons
this is the basic idea

"i spend a 5-digit number sum to get my dream pc and get free games from

torrent

sites"

Console Owner:Consoles are freaking aweomse.PC ..eh.!who needs that.
Gaming PC owner:Console Sucks!!My PC is the BOSS. :mrgreen:

Those who own both:.Once they finish a nice title ON console..they will come up sayin..Dude Console Rocsks..hell ya and all. :-D

Once they catch up Game like Crysis or any other FPS ..they will be like..consoles are Sh#t.My PC is damn awesome.

PC VS. CONSOLES..Matter of Personal Choice.LIKE A BOSS

CommanderShawnzer said:
the Real Reason why people here like PC
you get pirated games as easy as hell on a pc
New hardware and expensive console games are secondary reasons
this is the basic idea

Well that could be a major reason but does not cover the truth in entirety.

The fact is that, in today's world almost every household either wants or already has a "Home PC" at home, with limited or good gaming capabilities. Also getting games is easy, friends who have it on their HDD or nefarious markets openly selling pirated copies and gaming expenditure is negligible. In such a scenario, yes that makes PC gaming popular.

But then there are also people who own a decent 50k rig and still use pirated games and sometimes buy a few games.

Then there are people who buy only legal games.

So mostly is a direct co-relation to lack of resources, coupled with lack of knowledge about piracy and lastly indifference to piracy.

So coupling all PC games like this will make you prone to a lot of wrath

---

There are also people like me who own a console (ever gen) and a decent gaming PC to play all games.

To summarise, PC gaming has it's own share of features to be popular aside from piracy.

Sujeet said:
Console Owner:Consoles are freaking aweomse.PC ..eh.!who needs that.
Gaming PC owner:Console Sucks!!My PC is the BOSS.
Those who own both:.Once they finish a nice title ON console..they will come up sayin..Dude Console Rocsks..hell ya and all.
Once they catch up Game like Crysis or any other FPS ..they will be like..consoles are Sh#t.My PC is damn awesome.

PC VS. CONSOLES..Matter of Personal Choice.LIKE A BOSS

You summarised my thread in 3 lines. Not fair

Most people who own all three gaming machines PC/PS3/Xbox have nothing to say about which is better, which in itself is a testament to say that none of it beats the other.

Sarath said:
Most people who own all three gaming machines PC/PS3/Xbox have nothing to say about which is better, which in itself is a testament to say that none of it beats the other.

Completely True.!

Well I don't own all but I have played on all the platforms and they all are equal although graphics are better on PC in any case.

^^In most of PC port cases only resolution are of higher order(1080p at most).
GFX is constitued not just by Texture resolutions.
And mind that we have tons of BAD PC PORTS and vice versa(very rare).
MOST exclusive PS3 Titles are either Full 1080P or well Up-scaled 720p, unlike X360 which fetaures mainly 720P Upscaled content due to inferior hardware.
Games Like Uncharterd 3/Killzone 2/3/Resistance 2/3(PS3) ,Gears Of War(X360) are Right-in-face challenge(PUCHES BADLY) to crysis and battlefield on PC.

Gran Turismo 5 And Forz Motorsport 4 is worth mentioning here.

Actually if you are not looking for it, you won't find much difference between PC and PS3.

Some games though seem so at a single glance but many look no different. And some AAA titles are not even available cross platform.

pc also is genre lacking
most pc games Are FPS then comes RPG then RTS.Pc is only good for these three genres
console covers everything(apart from RTS)
also ANY console has a certain number of exclusives(that is platform exclusives and console exclusives).pc might have 1 or 2 exclusives(starcraft 2 heck,even witcher 2 and crysis were ported to consoles)and a bunch of MMO's(but seriously who plays MMO's in india unless it's those F2P ones on steam)
The BottomLine

Console has the power of Numbers,PC has the power of eyecandy
i prefer numbers over eye candy
so its a matter of personal choice

LIKE A BOSS

You are wrong about "Lack Of Genre" on PC.!!

Every Game genre known or unknown exists on PC and their are tons of games availbale from each of them.
And if you run out of Games in any genre which generally you never will, Just move to Indie Goodness.!

You are wrong about "Lack Of Genre" on PC.!!

Every Game genre known or unknown exists on PC and their are tons of games availbale from each of them.
And if you run out of Games in any genre which generally you never will, Just move to Indie Goodness.!

e.g
tell me some non-indie fighting games for PC(current gen)

CommanderShawnzer said:
e.g
tell me some non-indie fighting games for PC(current gen)

1. Street fighter 4
2. Street fighter 4 arcade edition.
3. There was going to be released a game about tekken. Don't exactly remember the name.

Sujeet said:
You are wrong about "Lack Of Genre" on PC.!!

Every Game genre known or unknown exists on PC and their are tons of games availbale from each of them.
And if you run out of Games in any genre which generally you never will, Just move to Indie Goodness.!

Agreed.

gameranand said:
1. Street fighter 4
2. Street fighter 4 arcade edition.
3. There was going to be released a game about tekken. Don't exactly remember the name.

thats it?

Consoles
tekken series
street fighter series
marvel vs capcom
street fighter X tekken
BlazBlue
mortalkombat
soulcalibur series
and there may be ones that i may not know about

Every Game genre known or unknown exists on PC and their are tons of games availbale from each of them.
And if you run out of Games in any genre which generally you never will, Just move to Indie Goodness.!

as if consoles are suffering from some game drought

.
consoles will have generally more games for the simple reason that they are more in number(and more people buy consoles and console games)
unlike our country where people want everything in one box

CommanderShawnzer said:
as if consoles are suffering from some game drought .
consoles will have generally more games for the simple reason that they are more in number(and more people buy consoles and console games)
unlike our country where people want everything in one box

Does Consoles have games like Limbo?

Well our fight is turning into name the game which is available in one platform not other

Anyways I feel these days that consoles can price games a bit higher than PC. Why? Well initial investment to get a console is lot lesser than PC. A good gaming PC costs 50k(we have said it many times now) whereas consoles mostly cost half that and now even lesser. Enough budget for 10 games. Although the current pricing should fall IMO.

thetechfreak said:
1.Does Consoles have games like Limbo?

2.Well our fight is turning into name the game which is available in one platform not other

Anyways I feel these days that consoles can price games a bit higher than PC. Why? Well initial investment to get a console is lot lesser than PC. A good gaming PC costs 50k(we have said it many times now) whereas consoles mostly cost half that and now even lesser. Enough budget for 10 games. 3.Although the current pricing should fall IMO.

1.consoles dont have games like limbo they have limbo and other indies(in fact limbo was released on XBL arcade for the 360,then ported to pc and ps3)any hit indie these days get ported to the "big TWO"
2.agreed
3.yeah current console game prices are obscene,though pc games abroad are same as consoles(here distributors give us subsidies for the simple reason that.....................india is the "P" capital of the world.you can see examples on TDF.lotsa "game experts" get thier pc copies from torrent sites)

PC games are cheaper because the production of the game discs for PC has been set up in India itself. Reason why we see such cool prices for PC games.

Consolers have been asking for a disc minting factory for the PS3 and/ xbox too to bring the prices down but we are yet to see it happen.

Since all console games are imported (we get the UK/EU version, we don't have a specific region, atleast for PS3) the games are priced high. It is also seen in PC games which are not produced locally, I may vaguely quote Skyrim etc as such.

thetechfreak said:
Does Consoles have games like Limbo?

Err...limbo came out first in a console and last again in another console.

Xbox > PC > PS3

accuracy questionable but so I heard. It was an xbox exclusive for really long. Super meat boy still is and will never make it to PC or PS3.

Sarath said:
PC games are cheaper because the production of the game discs for PC has been set up in India itself. Reason why we see such cool prices for PC games.

Consolers have been asking for a disc minting factory for the PS3 and/ xbox too to bring the prices down but we are yet to see it happen.

Since all console games are imported (we get the UK/EU version, we don't have a specific region, atleast for PS3) the games are priced high. It is also seen in PC games which are not produced locally, I may vaguely quote Skyrim etc as such.

Err...limbo came out first in a console and last again in another console.

Xbox > PC > PS3

accuracy questionable but so I heard. It was an xbox exclusive for really long. Super meat boy still is and will never make it to PC or PS3.

Super meat boy had been available for PC for god knows how long.

Damn so its only PS3 that won't get it. Sucks!

Super meat boy is available for PC and I have played it on my PC.

Sarath said:
Damn so its only PS3 that won't get it. Sucks!

yup,seemingly MS/MS indie devs believe that the 360 and win PC are brothers so one indie is ported to another platform
sadly with PS MS has a different relationship...............

Porting a xbox game to pc or vice versa is easier than ps3 to any or vice versa. Also ps3 is competetion so....

Microsoft Recommendes All Indies To USE XNA Framework to develop games for XBOX Live Indie Store and since XNA is seamlessly integrated into Windows Environment Too, its easy for Indies to Hop from Xbox bandwagon to Windows.

N

Sarath said:
Now a lot of people don't buy games, which in itself is why there is a huge support for PC gaming in many. It is a personal moral choice though.

Most PC Gamers don't spend on their SOFTWARES, GAMES and EVEN OS! Hence they remain PC Gamers...and also another reason why QUALITY SINGLE PLAYER games are declining!

yet, they blame consoles.... :shock:

novas242001 said:
Most PC Gamers don't spend on their SOFTWARES, GAMES and EVEN OS! Hence they remain PC Gamers...and also another reason why QUALITY SINGLE PLAYER games are declining!

yet, they blame consoles....

Quality single player games, you mean those kiddie games where you are spoon fed with the scripted sequences?

cyborg47 said:
Quality single player games, you mean those kiddie games where you are spoon fed with the scripted sequences?

Mass Effect 3 is Kiddie Game.Hmm..... :blink:

Sujeet said:
Mass Effect 3 is Kiddie Game.Hmm.....

In reference to games like Dragon Age Origins, Witcher 2, etc.

And yeah, ME3 is definitely a kiddie game

dont believe me? ask someone who played the first one too.

^^
You are definitely a right man in wrong place then!!!

cyborg47 said:
In reference to games like Dragon Age Origins, Witcher 2, etc.

And yeah, ME3 is definitely a kiddie game dont believe me? ask someone who played the first one too.

Dude I have Finished ME2.
ME3 half done.
ME1 completed just a week back.Still have no idea of what are you talkin

ME3>>ME2>>>ME1

Sujeet said:
^^
You are definitely a right man in wrong place then!!!

Dude I have Finished ME2.
ME3 half done.
ME1 completed just a week back.Still have no idea of what are you talkin
ME3>>ME2>>>ME1

Should have played ME1 first

ME 2 and 3 are definitely kiddie games compared to 1.

Sujeet said:
^^
You are definitely a right man in wrong place then!!!

A little too foolish for you to decide that?

Sujeet said:
^^
ME3 half done.

oops! wait till the end. You ll stop giving a damn of the whole series.

cyborg47 said:
oops! wait till the end. You ll stop giving a damn of the whole series.

Lol.
I know about the ending thing.
I bet i wont be disappointed.
I dont get too attached to Game to be blown off by jerky story. :wink:

I judge games by Tech-n-Technique rather than story-emo-drama

Sujeet said:
I judge games by Tech-n-Technique rather than story-emo-drama

your way. good for you

But Im kinda surprised to see somebody praising Tech-n-Technique of a story-centric game like Mass effect.

Sarath said:
Actually if you are not looking for it, you won't find much difference between PC and PS3.

Some games though seem so at a single glance but many look no different. And some AAA titles are not even available cross platform.

back in 2008/09 yes. Right now? hell no!!

cyborg47 said:
your way. good for you

But Im kinda surprised to see somebody praising Tech-n-Technique of a story-centric game like Mass effect.

LOL.
As i said i never get attached to Story or melodrama.Thats Kids Choice
Praising a RPG is not what i am ever gonna do :wink:

If i am not satisfied with the Gameplay of a game then i dont a give a f about it whether its story or the visuals.

Well when it comes to accuracy PC wins hands down with the mouse(not counting XIM3), there was once a cross platform game, called Shadowrun in which normal pc gamers r@ped best X360 players, same analogy for PS3, the consoles need support for mouse and keyboard, official support.

cyborg47 said:
Quality single player games, you mean those kiddie games where you are spoon fed with the scripted sequences?

ohhh and your definition of "mature" games are games like BF3,counterstrike,teamfortress 2?

those games are called Run-n-gun games mostly played by impatient kids
for kiddies only gameplay and the "fun" factor is important.

for a real buying mature gamer EVERYTHINGis important Be it story,gameplay or graphics

Most PC Gamers don't spend on their SOFTWARES, GAMES and EVEN OS! Hence they remain PC Gamers...

yet, they blame consoles....

this. is a fact.In India the majority of PC gamers(mostly pesky "student" types) never spend on anything(then there are "suckers" like me who actually buy games) thats why
they love PC's
reasons like

PC graphics are awesome

KB+mouse is more accurate

are other reasons
while getting everything free is the main reason and for people who do buy some games its because they get it cheap(specialist beggar rates Read : "subsidies" for us indians)

CommanderShawnzer said:
ohhh and your definition of "mature" games are games like BF3,counterstrike,teamfortress 2?

Never knew games like Counterstrike, team fortress 2 were single player :lol:

Btw, I already mentioned the examples. Not sure why you bought up CS, TF and bf3 under the mature category

And I really don't understand how most of the people on this thread are making statements like 'indians don't buy games; are pirates' etc. What are you all basing your statements on? are there some kind of statistics or are they just randon/stupid opinions? If it was really true, the torrents sites would be filled with indians alone lol. And don't forget, indian gaming market is a ton of business here, also one of the reasons why most of the publishers lower their prices.

cyborg47 said:
1Never knew games like Counterstrike, team fortress 2 were single player
Btw, I already mentioned the examples. Not sure why you bought up CS, TF and bf3 under the mature category

2And I really don't understand how most of the people on this thread are making statements like 'indians don't buy games; are pirates' etc. What are you all basing your statements on? are there some kind of statistics or are they just randon/stupid opinions? If it was really true, the torrents sites would be filled with indians alone lol. And don't forget, 3indian gaming market is a ton of business here, also one of the reasons why most of the publishers lower their prices.

1.you said it.
this was said

ohhh and your definition of "mature" games are games like BF3,counterstrike,teamfortress 2?

since most single-player games are scripted
2.just go to the "gamerz" section you will find many posts saying

my game is non-genuine

no my D2 was not legit

or something similar
if you want proof you may not find exact figures but a host of articles
because any sane indian would never say he owns a p-rated game
(Indian Culture :get stuff from the wrong channel but never acknowledge it)
from our very own TDF *www.thinkdigit.com/forum/gamerz/96805-video-game-piracy-india.html
3.that ton of business thing is mostly for time-pass mobile games
most publishers lower thier pc game prices so indians buy games not lift them off some torrent sites

Hmm..never mind.
May I know your age? if its alright for you.

CommanderShawnzer said:
1.you said it.

I'd suggest you to re-read my posts. May be you have got me wrong or something.

PC all the way because:-
1) PC have way more better graphics than console
2) PC are more future proof than console
3) BTW who are proud of console exclusives games,PC have in fact more exclusives than
console,which are basically whole bunch of RTS which console can't handle
4)Games are made from PC
5) The most important you can mod the games in PC :-D

puneet sharma said:
2) PC are more future proof than console

Even a decent 60k Gaming Rig would start giving Hiccups in Next 6 months at Max Settings for Latest Games Released At that Time.
For instance At the time of release of Crysis there was no GPU/CPU available in market which could Handle it at Max Settings.

This is not what you call a future proof Solution.

Now Consider this

X360: Years of Availability:7 yrs approx.
PS3: Years of availability:6yrs approx.
Nintendo Wii: Years of Availabilty:6yrs approx.

All 3 major Consoles are here for 6+yrs and so every major Game release is directly targeted at same hardware not to mention that Console Games runs at their max galore since they are optimized to make most use of available H/W resources(most of them atleast).

In nutshell any one who bought a PS3/Wii/X360 4-5 yrs back is still able to Enjoy Major Game release without any Upgrade.This is what we call being Future-Proof.

Sony & Microsoft have refused to release any details over their Upcoming Consoles(Anticipated to be PS4 & X720 respectively) for the Year 2012(No Cosnole release from them before 2013) So current gen Console owners can happily be ascertained of the fact that can atleast continue to Enjoy New Release for their Consoles for one more year if not more.

To call PC Hardware Future-proof in any context is irrelevant.Same is true for everything tech.
But from past Trends in Gaming and Console industry it will be safe to say that more or less Console Gaming is the one that owns the tag of Future proof not the PC.

Console Vs. PC Discussion is similar to
iOS Vs. Android
Linux Vs. Windows Vs. Mac
Intel Vs. AMD etc.
It all depends on the viewpoint and preference of People(and fanboys :wink:

)

puneet sharma said:
2) PC are more future proof than console

How is that?

Sujeet said:
Even a decent 60k Gaming Rig would start giving Hiccups in Next 6 months at Max Settings for Latest Games Released At that Time.

just lower the damn video settings, the game might not look better than the very high setting, but definitely looks better than the console version of the same game

(arkham city, skyrim are perfect examples, they literally look like $hit on consoles)

Its PC for me, the only possible advantage the consoles have is the exclusive titles. Other than that? none

puneet sharma said:
5) The most important you can mod the games in PC

This!!!

Sujeet said:
MOST exclusive PS3 Titles are either Full 1080P or well Up-scaled 720p,

Who feeds you with all this kind of misinformation? NO, 'most' of the ps3 titles DONT run on full hd. Its just some light weight(technically) games that run on 1080p coz they aren't really as heavy as uncharted 2/3 or god of war 3.

Sujeet said:
Games Like Uncharterd 3/Killzone 2/3/Resistance 2/3(PS3) ,Gears Of War(X360) are Right-in-face challenge(PUCHES BADLY) to crysis and battlefield on PC.

This might be your personal opinion, no offence but that comparision if too stupid dont you think? comparing 720p/30fps games to biggies like crysis and battlefiled 3? dude what are you on? heavily misinformed, or a hardcore console fanboy.
I ve played all the console games you mentioned above, and they looked good for what they are. There were a ton of moments where i found those games down right ugly, yeah even uncharted.
You better play some 'good' PC games like Battlefield 3(Jesus!! dude how can you even bring this gem of a game into a console comparison? Insult to dice lol), Witcher 2(the art direction and the tech aspects are mind blowing), Skyrim(Its a must play on PC, 60fps, 1080p, brilliant draw distance, and the graphics mods are the best till date and make the game look miles better than the stock look), Metro 2033(another must play gem here

), before making those kind of pointless comparisons. Im sure they ll blow the hell out of you

Sarath said:
How is that?

May be he want to mention PC's are easily upgradeable :wink:

puneet sharma said:
PC all the way because:-
1) PC have way more better graphics than console
2) PC are more future proof than console
3) BTW who are proud of console exclusives games,PC have in fact more exclusives than
console,which are basically whole bunch of RTS which console can't handle
4)Games are made from PC
5) The most important you can mod the games in PC

1)provided you have the cash to put in(in 20 or 23k a good gaming rig can't be made)
2)please read Sujeet's post below yours
3) :lol:

that line is used by PC fanboys
the "Big 2" have thier own Move/Kinect crapware + exclusives for thier platform + general console exclusives AND console exclusives from the earlier generation(ps,ps2,Xbox) + high-profile "Indies"
4)OK
5)you Can't Mod all games (only the ones who have official mod engine support)unless you talk about cheating(read "trainers")

I'm not saying that consoles are superior or anything or PC is great whatever
PC has eyecandy, consoles have more variety in games
also its on personal choice
people who prefer eye-popping graphics on a limited number of games go for PC
people who like bigger game catalogues and motion gaming go for console

cyborg47 said:
I ve played all the console games you mentioned above, and they looked good for what they are. There were a ton of moments where i found those games down right ugly, yeah even uncharted.
You better play some 'good' PC games like Battlefield 3(Jesus!! dude how can you even bring this gem of a game into a console comparison? Insult to dice lol), Witcher 2(the art direction and the tech aspects are mind blowing), Skyrim(Its a must play on PC, 60fps, 1080p, brilliant draw distance, and the graphics mods are the best till date and make the game look miles better than the stock look), Metro 2033(another must play gem here ), before making those kind of pointless comparisons. Im sure they ll blow the hell out of you

Say No More.
Your words are clear of what you have played and what you haven't.
:facepalm:

I thought I asked your age

@cyborg47
Take a look at Sarath or ComanderShawnzer.

They know the real difference ,advantages and disadvantages of PC.
they are not inclined toward PC or Console.

The way you talk makes me sure that your knowledge is bound to PC only.
Otherwise you haven't made those idiotic comments. :smile:

Take a look at this

Sarath said:
Despite owning both it is difficult to say which is better. It is impossible for me to ditch one for another. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. I love them dearly and honestly I don't care which one is better.

this

CommanderShawnzer said:
I'm not saying that consoles are superior or anything or PC is great whatever
PC has eyecandy, consoles have more variety in games
also its on personal choice
people who prefer eye-popping graphics on a limited number of games go for PC
people who like bigger game catalogues and motion gaming go for console

And this

Console Vs. PC Discussion is similar to
iOS Vs. Android
Linux Vs. Windows Vs. Mac
Intel Vs. AMD etc.
It all depends on the viewpoint and preference of People(and fanboys )

kids these days!
It isnt really about knowledge. Its just realizing whats crap, and whats not. lol!

Oh and btw, Im no PC elitist or a fanboy. Just get the facts straight, whatever it is.

Sujeet said:
MOST exclusive PS3 Titles are either Full 1080P or well Up-scaled 720p,

Knowledge eih?

PC has eyecandy, consoles have more variety in games.

Games like Minecraft, beg to differ

cyborg47 said:
Knowledge eih?

List of full HD 1080P PS3 games
Dont keep Making a fool of yourself.
Go get a full HDTV and a PS3.
Get Original PS3 Titles (Gran Turismo,Killzone 2/3 and Unchartered 2/3).

Hook it to the PS3 and see what display options you get.
PS3 Upscales 720p Content to 1080p.

Is that too hard a fact to swallow for you??

And in case you dont have a reading problem try to read post properly.
Its the Exclusive PS3 tiltes that has been referred.

Sujeet said:
List of full HD 1080P PS3 games
Dont keep Making a fool of yourslef.
Go get a full HDTV and a PS3.
Get Original PS3 Titles (Gran Turismo,Killzone 2/3 and Unchartered 2/3).
Hook it to the PS3 and see what display options you get.
PS3 Upscales 720p Content to 1080p.
Is that too hard a fact to swallow for you??

Mind = Blown!
I feel like leaving TDF, thanks to you :facepalm:

Sujeet said:
PS3 Upscales 720p Content to 1080p.

This, is right. Not just PS3, 360 does that too.

Sujeet said:
MOST exclusive PS3 Titles are either Full 1080P or well Up-scaled 720p,

and this is wrong. Thats all i pointed out. You really didn't need go search a link just to prove me otherwise lol.

Now before the hulk inside of you comes out, let me make some things clear. I'm no PC fanboy or a console hater. Infact, Im a diehard fan of some games on PlayStation (Like Last Guardian, God of War3, Uncharted2/3, Journey, etc). Im just trying to point out some foolish statements some of us here made. Stuff like 'PC gaming causing downfall of quality of the single player games on consoles', 'talking about a story centric game like Mass effect and stating the story parts as kid's choice', 'calling BF3 a run-n-gun game', 'Calling the indian gamers as pirate, just because some people on this forum have pirated stuff' and ofcourse the statement made me laugh like anything 'MOST exclusive PS3 Titles are either Full 1080P or well Up-scaled 720p'...when in the world did the PS3 exclusives are working on 1080p!? they are upscaled from 720p, thats the native resolution.

cyborg47 said:
Mind = Blown!
I feel like leaving TDF, thanks to you

You May.Happily :smile:

cyborg47 said:
and this is wrong. Thats all i pointed out. You really didn't need go search a link just to prove me otherwise lol.

It shouldnt have been Full HD.Rather Upscaled 1080p/1080i instead.
I agree.
But you have made your life harder by not getting the Point.Cant Help.
The Point was PS3 has more 1080p Upscalable Content/Games in comparison to X360.

hahah

no body talked about Wii-u

puneet sharma said:
hahah no body talked about Wii-u

LOL.
We dont need any talk about the Successor of best Selling Current Gen Console. :wink:

This is quite lame, there will always be comparisons between PC and consoles..but why do we need to criticize the other..As Sarath rightly said "The complete Gaming experience is achieved by getting both, a console and a PC"
I have played on PS3, X360 and I own a Gaming PC...Playing on a console is more relaxing and enriching. It is due to the fact, as mentioned several times already, that consoles have a sole purpose..GAMING..they have been made to give the gamer a perfect atmosphere and an enriching experience..

Graphics is not an appropriate factor for comparison..Even if a game looks mediocre, it can still be the best if it has awesome gameplay, story and characters..Most of those legendary and epic games we have played over the years had mediocre to lame graphics..but we don't remember them for just their visuals(wrt the time they were released in) but for the overall experience..

Playing Gods of War 3 on a PS3 is just pure bliss..I never had so much fun playing on PC..
Exclusives are one main reason that there is this so-called war between consoles and PC.
but take any game which is available on both the platforms and u will be much more relaxed playing on a console..I cannot sit, continuously, in front of my PC for more than 10 hours playing a game..I did that on a PS3, even came close playing Gears of War 3 on xbox(but it isn't the same)

@Cyborg47..u think ME2 and ME3 are childish? in what context?
Gameplay of ME2 and ME3 is far better than ME1..story of ME3 is better than ME2 and ME1..NPCs and other characters feel more alive in ME3..ME1 had a good story but it is the redundant gameplay that stops me from playing that game again..the graphics don't matter much but ME3 looks way better than ME2 and ME1..
You believe that a temporary, crappy, ending can spoil an entire game? ME3 has to be one of my favorite gaming experiences on PC..and an incomplete ending cannot spoil all the awesome moments I had while playing this game..And I will add that the game isn't over yet..as it is quite evident throughout the course of this game that something isn't right..which I won't indulge in, in this thread..

You call Single player games scripted and kiddie..Halo, Far Cry, Assassins Creed series, The Witcher, ME, Fallout and countless more..these are kiddish right? I'll be damned..

a high-end PC with the right accessories can be a beast, it will give u enormous fps, a great visual effect and with the right chair and other comforting objects and u will have what console owners already do,lacking the graphics hardware...But tbh Graphics just enhance the overall feel of the game..they don't impact the gameplay..if a game sucks to the core..having Frostbite 2/CryEngine3 won't make up for it..

PCs need constant hardware upgrades to be able to play all the games at the best possible settings...and if u say, just dial the settings down a notch, then isn't that what we are already getting in a Console..better gaming experience with a stripped down visual?

Agreed, that the price of console game is very high..but, let's say, in a span of 5 years..the total money spent on a gaming PC incl games is a lot higher than that spent on a console + TV + Games...Long term investment, you may say..

To conclude, one is incomplete without the other if hoping for a complete gaming experience...

cyborg47 said:
I thought I asked your age

Well this ain't of my concern, but a lot of 15 year old are smarter than 20 something people.. Intelligence and awareness isn't confined to one's age..
TDF is a proof of that..young teenagers know more about tech stuff than older and working professionals..

Hmm. May be young teenagers don't read and understand properly? Let me quote the post i was replying to before you all make those weird assumptions and pointlessly bring down games like battlefield 3, Counterstrike, halo, assassins creed etc.

novas242001 said:
Most PC Gamers don't spend on their SOFTWARES, GAMES and EVEN OS! Hence they remain PC Gamers...and also another reason why QUALITY SINGLE PLAYER games are declining!

There it is, now this dude here believes that its PC piracy that's bringing down the quality of the single player games, and i was trying to prove him wrong about that. I hardly see any single player games declining in terms of quality, and because of PC piracy? like wtf!? And I was also referring to good PC single player games like Dragon Age Origins, Witcher 2 etc NOT battlefield 3, counterstrike, team fortress 2, wonder why that guy even talked about them lol.

Oh about that scripted SP crap I'd talked about, I had Call of duty in my mind, and the recent obsession of the developers to make it look 'cool' with the unnecessary scripted sequences. Its like the game is saying to the gamer, press X and leave everything else to me lol

Reaper_vivek said:
@Cyborg47..u think ME2 and ME3 are childish? in what context?
Gameplay of ME2 and ME3 is far better than ME1..story of ME3 is better than ME2 and ME1..NPCs and other characters feel more alive in ME3..ME1 had a good story but it is the redundant gameplay that stops me from playing that game again..the graphics don't matter much but ME3 looks way better than ME2 and ME1..
You believe that a temporary, crappy, ending can spoil an entire game? ME3 has to be one of my favorite gaming experiences on PC..and an incomplete ending cannot spoil all the awesome moments I had while playing this game..And I will add that the game isn't over yet..as it is quite evident throughout the course of this game that something isn't right..which I won't indulge in, in this thread..

Well, I'm a die hard fan of ME1, it was perfect for its time. I never enjoyed any video game story as much as I did with Mass effect 1. It was a console game first, and a PC port second, so I really can't complain about the graphics.
Mass effect 2, there are some parts that I loved, like the character development, writing (especially Mordin Solus, my all time favourite character in the whole series), the graphics etc. But I was disappointed with the over all story of the game, it was more about the team and very little about the reaper threat. Yeah there were collectors, but the over all story didn't feel as engaging as Mass effect 1. And also, I hated the way they streamlined the game, lesser RPG elements, no Vehicular gameplay

and felt more of a corridor shooter.

Coming to Mass effect 3, its very much of a personal opinion. Wonderful game...until the end which I absolutely hated and spoiled the entire experience for me. Now I feel like I dont even give a damn about the story. I even lost all the respect I had for Bioware.

Reaper_vivek said:
a high-end PC with the right accessories can be a beast, it will give u enormous fps, a great visual effect and with the right chair and other comforting objects and u will have what console owners already do,lacking the graphics hardware...But tbh Graphics just enhance the overall feel of the game..they don't impact the gameplay..if a game sucks to the core..having Frostbite 2/CryEngine3 won't make up for it..

If you're saying Battlefield 3/Crysis 2 only look good but have a bad gameplay. I ll have to disagree with you

Reaper_vivek said:
Agreed, that the price of console game is very high..but, let's say, in a span of 5 years..the total money spent on a gaming PC incl games is a lot higher than that spent on a console + TV + Games...Long term investment, you may say..

Not sure about that. Now I don't have a console, so I wont give a crap about the pricing and all. But PC gaming hasn't been that costly for me.
Or may if you have some free time, make up a mock PC configuration, a mid range PC will do and compare it with the console investment.
I believe that the difference wont be very large. The costly PC hardware makes up for the cheaper games(STEAM!!

) and the cheaper console hardware makes for the costly games, subscription stuff etc. Please don't flame me about this, Im no console gamer, just making some assumptions.

I knew you would think I was talking about these games..but just because i mentioned 2 of the best graphics engine I wasn't implying towards their respecive games..I love BF3 and I really liked Crysis2..
The emphasis was that game-play and other aspects are more important than the graphics..

Ps3 or pc... lol the age old million dollar question. No one can really tell you hell you cant even yourself decide wether you would want a pc or a ps3. I am a really big fan of simulator driving and hence i like gran turismo series, for me it was really essential i get a ps3 for gt5. Exclusives like uncharted and gran turismo will never come to the pc. And it is wrong to say that these games are for kiddies, infact imho i really feel that the only let down of a console is its hardware otherwise a console offers much higher fun factor and sense of immersion than a computer can. Even with top notch FPS titles releasing on the pc as well as the ps3 i will prefer to buy them for my ps3 because i like to play on my ps3. The point i am trying to drive home in simple words is that it is your choice, and it is not comparable each has pros and cons.

Reaper_vivek said:
PCs need constant hardware upgrades to be able to play all the games at the best possible settings...and if u say, just dial the settings down a notch, then isn't that what we are already getting in a Console..better gaming experience with a stripped down visual?

I think that works pretty well. Battlefield 3 for example, I play the game in medium settings to get a higher framerate and game still kicks a$$ in terms of visuals and destruction. And ofcourse the map size, player count are all higher than the console counterpart.
Skyrim is also a good example. The game is still not fixed properly on PS3, has terrible draw distance on both the consoles, bu looks great on PC even at the medium settings. Dont forget the mods too, its something everybody must experience before they want to make any comments, they improve the hell out of the game.

you just cant say that because a ps3 has lower eye candy and for that much i can get a much better pc its useless. The argument is totally baseless because when the ps3 was released there very no systems which could perform with that power. And thats what is going to happen even with the next generation of consoles. The ps4 will have more power than a 7970 combined with a i7 in crossfire. All the pc fanatics will turn away because it will be quite expensive. After 4 years when the prices drop down and the pc becomes cheaper they will all say and i quote " HAHA look at those poor *******s spent 60k on a piece of junk which cant even run crysis 4 on 4k resolution and full 3D. I just bought a pc for 35k with a screen and i can own crysis. "

Reaper_vivek said:
I knew you would think I was talking about these games..but just because i mentioned 2 of the best graphics engine I wasn't implying towards their respecive games..I love BF3 and I really liked Crysis2..
The emphasis was that game-play and other aspects are more important than the graphics..

Haha..got that already, just wanted to make sure you weren't making fun of battlefield 3

some idiots here were doing that here lol.

Gaming experience is not always about visual quality is it? if game play was all about graphics then we would be better off playing the most graphically intense games ever irrespective of their story line and characters. For me an immersive game is one where i feel a part of the game, like a natural flow i can connect with the characters and i feel i get my moneys worth when i play the game. Not run around in a Invisible suit in a jungle hoping for some cheap alien invasion.

But this doesn't mean that Consoles are inferior to PC..they give so much more than better visuals..and u cannot use a PC as relaxed as u were using a PC..I know I can't...

Consoles do not give better visuals than pc's.

Reaper_vivek said:
Well this ain't of my concern, but a lot of 15 year old are smarter than 20 something people.. Intelligence and awareness isn't confined to one's age..
TDF is a proof of that..young teenagers know more about tech stuff than older and working professionals..

QFT.

NoasArcAngel said:
Gaming experience is not always about visual quality is it? .

Billion Dollar Fact! :wink:

^^O really?

Oh btw, my first console purchase would be PS4

PC vs consoles comparison aside, games on PS have always been more mature, creative and a little anti-casual. specially stuff like Journey, Heavy Rain.. gotta admire the PS library.

cyborg47 said:
***CRAP***
[Uncharterd 3/Killzone 2/3/Resistance 2/3(PS3) ,Gears Of War(X360)]
I ve played all the console games you mentioned above, and they looked good for what they are. There were a ton of moments where i found those games down right ugly, yeah even uncharted.
***CRAP****

cyborg47 said:
Not sure about that. Now I don't have a console, so I wont give a crap about the pricing and all. But PC gaming hasn't been that costly for me.
Or may if you have some free time, make up a mock PC configuration, a mid range PC will do and compare it with the console investment.
I believe that the difference wont be very large. The costly PC hardware makes up for the cheaper games(STEAM!! ) and the cheaper console hardware makes for the costly games, subscription stuff etc. Please don't flame me about this, Im no console gamer, just making some assumptions.

cyborg47 said:
Oh btw, my first console purchase would be PS4 PC vs consoles comparison aside, games on PS have always been more mature, creative and a little anti-casual. specially stuff like Journey, Heavy Rain.. gotta admire the PS library.

The Man who knows it all without even owning a console.
You are the BOSS.Knew it from the beginning. :wink:

WAOHHHH!! we have a CID prathyuman here! hats off to you sir!!

TDF is so proud of you!
Ever heard of words like 'FRIENDS' and 'BORROWING' or 'LENDING'??

Typical 14 year old attitude, always want to jump in first and prove somebody or something wrong lol.
You sir, have failed! terribly!

cyborg47 said:
WAOHHHH!! we have a CID prathyuman here! hats off to you sir!! TDF is so proud of you!
Ever heard of words like 'FRIENDS' and 'BORROWING' or 'LENDING'??

Say Anything you like now.(Anyone in your shoes would have resorted to an exactly similar reply under these circumstances)
Everything is clear.
Case Closed.

BTW unlike just mindlessly tapping on the keyboard like you and just posting anything without judging its impact(that your childish attitude BTW)
I prefer to be vigilant and observant of the situation and behave accordingly. (Thats called being mature..And it doesnt come from Age!)

cyborg47 said:
Typical 14 year old attitude, always want to jump in first and prove somebody or something wrong lol.
You sir, have failed! terribly!

Its You.!

All right lads, time to go cut down the excitement a bit.

Alrite fine. But remember, forums are to share stuff and learn, not for proving yourself about anything. have fun

Liverpool_fan said:
All right lads, time to go cut down the excitement a bit.

AYE AYE captain!

Sujeet said:
Say Anything you like now.(Anyone in your shoes would have resorted to an exactly similar reply under these circumstances)
Everything is clear.
Case Closed.

Sujeet said:
Anyone in your shoes would have resorted to an exactly similar reply under these circumstances
!

errr is this some kind of a game or something? be a good boy now! :wink:

Sujeet said:
BTW unlike just mindlessly tapping on the keyboard like you and just posting anything without judging its impact(that your childish attitude BTW)
I prefer to be vigilant and observant of the situation and behave accordingly. (Thats called being maturity..And it doesnt come from Age!)

Alrite. fine. enough celebrations of your victory..just calm down, you dont want the mods come down and delete your posts do you?

Sujeet said:
BTW unlike just mindlessly tapping on the keyboard like you and just posting anything without judging its impact(that your childish attitude BTW)
I prefer to be vigilant and observant of the situation and behave accordingly. (Thats called being mature..And it doesnt come from Age!)

offtopic
+1

Case Closed

the person in-charge should get the que
to stop mentally regressed fanboy

cyborgs from ruining this thread

But remember, forums are to share stuff and learn, not for proving yourself about anything.

you first sir

@Sujeet : when retards don't understand Your point you press the [Ignr]

in your brain.Debating is Futile

on-topic
another PC advantage

even if you have and aging core 2 rig you can still indirectly brag about it in the Tech Forums

Lol. alrite, I apologize for being a little rude, but still back my points

CommanderShawnzer said:
on-topic
another PC advantage

even if you have and aging core 2 rig you can still indirectly brag about it in the Tech Forums

Smart guy huh! :lol:

Take rest for a while