Gaming PC or ps3+xbox 360

[screwballl]

I got the Wii, Gamecube and PC... just got the gamecube a few months ago for free with like 15 games and the finally talked the wife into the Wii now that we could actually find one (and afford it)...

[garetjax]

Originally Posted by Lead Head

...theres a reason why consoles are selling so well, and thats because they are [...] cheap.

I would agree with you on that point if this was 4-5 years ago when a console sold for $149 to $199 dollars. And even back then, the asking price for consoles were deemed expensive, just as they are now.

The fact is that consoles have more than doubled in price since the PS2 was released. This doubling of price is a trend that has only begun to materialize with the introduction of both the XBox 360 and the PS3, which are fetching prices of over $400. And this is not including the purchase of games, accessories, and peripherals as well. By the time things are said and done, a PS3, purchased for $400 (or $500 for the larger HDD), with all your games and accessories will cost close to $1,000 dollars; and that's a conservative number.

Originally Posted by Lead Head

...your argument about consoles being a money whole is kind of pointless, when you say you have to keep continually upgrading your PC to keep up.

My argument would be pointless, if in fact that is what I said. I said that consoles are a money sink when you must invest in the next iteration of a next generation console, which in most cases leaves your "old" console nothing more but a doorstop or a rather large paperweight.

In most cases, for a savvy computer builder, the only thing needed to take advantage of next generation games is a new video card. A much cheaper and more importantly, wiser investment than buying a new generation console. As I mentioned before, there are plenty of sub $200 video cards that can play Crysis with terrific results. Tell me that it's not a hard and bitter pill to swallow to invest $500 dollars in a new console just to play games like Heavenly Sword and Resistance: Fall of Man.

Originally Posted by Lead Head

To be able to play 1920x1080 games at full resolution at 60FPS is not cheap on the PC, especially for games like Call of Duty 4.

Then again, how many people actually need to play at that resolution with those kind of FPS? I mean seriously, think about it for a moment. The people you are talking about that "need" or can afford that kind of performance in a computer is maybe 5 to 10% of all computer gamers out there that even care to play at that kind of level.

Originally Posted by Lead Head

Not to mention when the inevitable happens, the PC industry takes a big leap, and you basically have to dump all of your old hardware, and start from scratch. Intel and AMD have done that a few times on us.

How is this "big leap" any different when the PS2 was replaced by the PS3? You basically have to dump all your old accessories, your peripherals, sometimes even games, all because they aren't compatible with a new iteration of a next generation console. All the money spent on an old console is essentially not working for you anymore. With PCs, it's different. You have an upgrade path. You can always play your old games, and you can always reuse your hardware.

The sheer versatility of PCs versus consoles and the fact that PCs are upgradeable are the most singular advantages over a console. In short, it breaks down like this. In most (if not all) cases, to play next generation games on a PC, it usually requires the investment of a new video card. $300 to $400 bucks tops. To play the next generation games on a next generation console sets you back $500 plus accessories, peripherals, and the games themselves.

The console is viable gaming platform for the lifespan of the console itself before you need to "upgrade" to the next best thing, which is about every 3-4 years. With a PC, the lifespan is much longer, and as mentioned earlier, far more cost effective as you aren't replacing the entire computer; just the components that matter most.

Regardless, the debate that rages between people about which gaming platform, PCs or consoles, are better will never end. We all have opinions, we all know what works for us. For me, I've never been a huge console guy. I could never see the point of investing large amounts of money into a console only for it to die within years when something new comes out; there are no "upgrades" for old console systems, no "patches" to make it live longer. With PC's, the investment is more solid, it is more tangible and real. With a PC, you have sheer versatility and longevity, something consoles have never been able to achieve.

[screwballl]

one thing everyone needs to remember: to make a game for the consoles, they need to put it together for at most 3 different systems, and some only release for one console making one set of rules for all gamers so they can have lean and simple code.
Also on the same line of thinking, most consoles when used with a regular TV has the game displayed at 640x480 and 25-30 fps, or even a HDTV which can be 1920x1080 and 1280x720p at 30-40fps. With these specs, they can concentrate on the the content and quality with much better results.
Compared to a PC which nowadays at the lowest runs at 1024x768 or higher, in many cases as high as 1900x1200... You are looking at higher computing power and frame rates PLUS the ability to run most any program out there not gaming related...
direct comparison:
Xbox 360:
3.2GHz x 3 cores (using mutli-thread so games see 6 threads)
1MB L2 cache @ 1.6GHz
256MB memory
ATI GPU Xenos, dual core 500 Mhz clock speed and 48 shader pipelines

PC:
anything from 1.2 to 5GHz CPU, possibly 1-8 cores
512KB to 12MB L2 cache
1GB to 8GB RAM
any number of GPUs

Consoles are limited one use boxes... of course you wouldn't expect your car stereo to be able to handle the A/C, GPS, antilock brakes and fuel pump pressure...
It all depends on what you expect and need from the "box".

[drew and not u]

Originally Posted by screwballl

one thing everyone needs to remember: to make a game for the consoles, they need to put it together for at most 3 different systems, and some only release for one console making one set of rules for all gamers so they can have lean and simple code.
Also on the same line of thinking, most consoles when used with a regular TV has the game displayed at 640x480 and 25-30 fps, or even a HDTV which can be 1920x1080 and 1280x720p at 30-40fps. With these specs, they can concentrate on the the content and quality with much better results.
Compared to a PC which nowadays at the lowest runs at 1024x768 or higher, in many cases as high as 1900x1200... You are looking at higher computing power and frame rates PLUS the ability to run most any program out there not gaming related...
direct comparison:
Xbox 360:
3.2GHz x 3 cores (using mutli-thread so games see 6 threads)
1MB L2 cache @ 1.6GHz
256MB memory
ATI GPU Xenos, dual core 500 Mhz clock speed and 48 shader pipelines

PC:
anything from 1.2 to 5GHz CPU, possibly 1-8 cores
512KB to 12MB L2 cache
1GB to 8GB RAM
any number of GPUs

Consoles are limited one use boxes... of course you wouldn't expect your car stereo to be able to handle the A/C, GPS, antilock brakes and fuel pump pressure...
It all depends on what you expect and need from the "box".

I don't think I can remember all that.

[screwballl]

only need to remember the first few lines... not all the specs

[drevsdre]

well, fortunately, i have both consoles and a PC...i just dropped about $1500 to get my pc back up since i have been out of it for the last year and a half. now, i could have done it for cheaper, but i would be paying more later to upgrade again. i have a 360, pS3(from the gf for Christmas), and some ol skool systems...3DO, Genesis, Nintendo 8bit, super nintendo, nin 64, - not a fan of the Cube - I play them all to this day. I have to say that both the console and PC give me something different. Since i love strategy games, i have to say PC is where it's at. But the console will not go away. I'll always play sports on the consoles. Some of the action games are top-notch. XBox Live is one of the best things to come along since...well, i dont know what. it makes the gaming experience so much sweeter. the console isn't near death, but as i look at the PC, after spending all of that money, i'm almost dissappointed. I used to love flight simulators(militrary ones, not Microsfot, even though thats' ok), but the market for that type of game is so weak. Everything seems to be watered down. I play CoD4, SoSE, City of Heroes, which is about 4 years old. I tried to get back into WoW, but haven't made it just yet. While the PC is more flexible, the console games are more diverse, and more affordable over the whole spectrum. You can always buy used games or systems. I wouldn't want to have one without the other.
o - and the 360 is much better than PS3 IMO

[unknown555525]

Just a few months ago I bougt my THIRD xbox360, because the other 2 fried like those do. That's several thousand down the drain, and Microsoft wouldn't replace it because I chucked the first one, and the second I attempted to fix myself and voided the warrantee that was already over 90 days old, and before I heard of the new several year thing. I've spent a TON!!!! of money on just the xbox360, and I'm actually unsatisfied with it still. I only own one now for GTA IV when it comes out this month :D and the game Rock band, other wise I would sell it. So that's probebly about $3000

I just built my new desktop from scratch, not using a SINGLE piece from an old PC because I sold my old PC to someone who wanted it really badly.

My new one (in my sig) costs me a total of $845 with tax and shipping, (not including my monitor which is a $1700 50" 1920x1080 75Hz LCD)
This much smaller investment has been amazingly more worthwhile than my horrible consoles. And what I got is actually OVERKILL for almost every game out there except for crysis. I even run Bioshock in 1920x1080 resolution with maximum graphics. I would LOVE to see the xbox360 do that at even 10fps, and I achieve a constant framerate of ALWAYS over 60fps.

PC technology is becoming cheaper, and I've been seeing the Nvidia 8600GT cards going around on Tigerdirect and newegg for about $59.99, couple that with a cheap 160GB hard drive, and a mobo/cpu/ram/case/psu combo that shows up on Tigerdirect every week, and you can build a suitable gaming PC for under $400 total that will OUTPERFORM an xbox360 or PS3 in nearly everything, plus be able to do other things that people usually use PC's for outside of gaming.

[screwballl]

console games only have to display the content at 640x480 and max 30fps so they can increase the quality level, and only work on one level of hardware.
With a PC the games have to be made to handle multiple levels of hardware and minimum 30 fps with modest hardware, which really equals out to the same level as a console at that fps.
I myself only have a Wii as the other consoles are too much of a waste of money for me, especially since it is mostly used by the wife and daughter with the easy and kid games.... although growing up I had most consoles available from the Atari to the original Playstation and Dreamcast. Now that I am older, married and kids of my own, I don't have as much time to put into games, and the time I do play is limited, with games like CS:S, SOSE, and COD4.

[drevsdre]

just out of curiosity, how does 3 Xbox 360's cost thousands of dollars? That's a new one in my book. i'm probably missing something though. I know all of our experiences are different. My 360, has not had a problem since I bought it 2 years ago. I am very satisfied. We can talk about graphics power and quality all day, but in my opinion, it's about gameplay and substance. That is a big reason why I still play some games of the past. I still love Herzog Zwei(Genesis), Final Fantasy for the NES and final fantasy 2 for the SNES...orignal Metal Gear...I could go on with other games, but you can see what I am saying. No doubt that the computer can dominate with market with power. But when the library is substantially smaller than the console side of the market, there's something to be said about it. I have to say that there are more quality games for the conse, at least for right now. I love great graphics, but give me a game with decent graphics and superb gameplay, and that's all i need. But to say again, that's why i have both. i love my puter and my consoles. i guess there isn't really a wrong answer...is there?

[screwballl]

when you look at 3 systems at $350 is over $1000, then $50-100 per game... I suspect $3000 is a bit of an exaggeration but still got the point across...

hell I remember when the original Atari and NES consoles were selling for $500 apiece...