Do you think controller/couch is a good reason for choosing pc or console
yes
33.8% (108)
33.8% (108)
no
55.9% (179)
55.9% (179)
other
10% (32)
10% (32)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: PC vs Console reasons

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Da Orky Man:

Ultratwinkie:

Why bother with splitscreen when everything is on-line anyway? The only reason people use splitscreen was because internet access wasn't universal. However, 20 years later, internet is widely used.

No. Just no. Online is NOT a replacement for splitscreen. Can you really say that playing aginst some faceless guy who may or may not even be on a mic is equal to playing against someone sitting next to you? Not all gamers are antisocial enough to not have any friends they can bear to be in the same room as.

it has nothing to do with being anti social - I just like all 1080 pixels to be MINE!

If that is what matters to you, of course it's a good reason. Choosing your game platform is your own personal decision, and therefore subjective.

One of the many reasons I got a PC is that I wouldn't be hogging the main TV, which meant I could play more. I had many other reasons, some important, some not so much.

Choose, buy, enjoy.

MeChaNiZ3D:

Glademaster:

MeChaNiZ3D:

You do...know what splitscreen is, don't you?

No. No I don't think that I have ever experience this thing called split screen. I just decided to come on to a forum and bash it for no reason other than to troll people and look like an idiot. It isn't like if you don't have the right aspect ratio the screen is fucked up due to split and trying to find working controllers and batteries and then only having a limited amount of people to play aren't problems with it. Not to mention people being dicks and screen looking. Yes split screen really was the epitome of multiplayer gaming.

My point is you don't have to move anything around except maybe a controller.

No your point was I was an idiot.

I would say that yes a preferring a controller and couch is a perfectly valid reason. Sure you can use a controller with PC games but very few actually have native support. When using third party programs to do it they are never anywhere are smooth as on a console. Hell even the few that I have tried that had native support didnt run as well.

Ultratwinkie:

Why bother with splitscreen when everything is on-line anyway? The only reason people use splitscreen was because internet access wasn't universal. However, 20 years later, internet is widely used.

Well because its more fun playing with somebody next to you then over the internet.

I'm sorry what? I don't understand this thread...

Both my PC and my console are hooked up to my TV, have controller ports and are within distance of my bed/seats.

What am I being asked here exactly?

I. Hate. These. Threads! -.-

Seriously does it really matter who uses what? At the end of the day, at least 95% of us on the escapist play games, if someone prefers a system to another, good for them. The community should not be divided by the PC and Console gamers.

I think quite a few people here need to grow up. Some people need to face it that not everyone can build there own PC no matter how easy it is, some people just don't like mucking about inside a computer tower to upgrade it, and prefer just to use what they bought. And some other people need to stop fuelling the fire and going against other peoples opinions. if someone prefers steam, good for them, no one should tell them otherwise.

PC gaming has it's pro's and cons.

Console gaming has it pro's and cons.

Anyone who says anything different is an idiot.

babinro:

The PC game pad has also been a very poor experience in general. I seldom have a PC game where the game pad will immediately function half as well as a console controller without calibrations or troubleshooting. Perhaps it's because my PC gamepad was old or not the 'right' one at the time.

Well my 360 controller works exactly the same way on the 360 as it does on my PC, no difference in experience at all. You do have to make sure you don't buy a rubbish controller. But if you want a console experience, why would you not use one from a console?

Das Boot:
I would say that yes a preferring a controller and couch is a perfectly valid reason. Sure you can use a controller with PC games but very few actually have native support. When using third party programs to do it they are never anywhere are smooth as on a console. Hell even the few that I have tried that had native support didnt run as well.

Well that's odd as I have hardly ever found a game that did not have native support for my 360 controller. The only major title not to have this recently was ME3 for PC which was bad by bioware. You want to back up your supposition that native support is rare, because the facts I think are otherwise.

I've never really gotten into the Console VS PC Debate.

I prefer to game on the PC, but for vastly different reasons. Here they are for those who care.

I needed a PC for my job (all three of them) and a particularly powerful one at that. At $900 for my laptop, I had everything I needed to run not only my production software, but also the games I owned. So I got into gaming on the PC.

People ask me why I don't have a console. First I'd have to buy a console ($300-400) then a TV to play it on ($100-300) plus games as they come out ($180 per year). Most of the games I'd want to buy on a console also come out for PC, and there are no console exclusives to make me want to buy a Playstation or XBox (or a Wii for that matter). I can plug a controller into my computer and hook it up to the TV if I'm in the lazy sunday mood.

Frankly, any reason for preferring one platform over the other is a valid reason to that person. Most people buy computers for work, and get a simple $200 office PC (or a Mac of equal specs for around $1200 tee hee) and buy a console because it's more convienent for them.

Everyone has their preferences. I don't understand why others need to justify their preference to other gamers. I have a buddy who likes gaming on the XBox, but recently begged me for help making his PC capable of running SWTOR (new video card and we were done).

I enjoy playing on consoles too. My brother and I play splitscreen MW3 when he comes over all the time. Takes me back to our childhood playing Mario 3 on our SNES.

Were I in a different position, I'd probably get into console gaming. But as it stands, I have a powerful PC, and all the games I want to buy always come out for PC. No need to buy a console.

Never understood that "PC or Console". I have a PC connected to my TV, I also have 3 consoles connected to it to. The PC is also connected to a normal screen which I can work at. I have an Xbox-controller to my PC, so for me the lines is pretty blurred between the PC and consoles...

Mimsofthedawg:

Da Orky Man:

Ultratwinkie:

Why bother with splitscreen when everything is on-line anyway? The only reason people use splitscreen was because internet access wasn't universal. However, 20 years later, internet is widely used.

No. Just no. Online is NOT a replacement for splitscreen. Can you really say that playing aginst some faceless guy who may or may not even be on a mic is equal to playing against someone sitting next to you? Not all gamers are antisocial enough to not have any friends they can bear to be in the same room as.

it has nothing to do with being anti social - I just like all 1080 pixels to be MINE!

1080p doesn't stand for 1080 pixels. The P stands for progressive scan.

As for the original topic, why not both? I can hook my PC or console up to the main TV set to do whatever I feel like. Hulu, netflix, escapist HD videos, and gaming.

I can hook controllers up to the PC, or the PS3, and do pretty much whatever. They both have good uses, so, why even ask this question?

Glademaster:

MeChaNiZ3D:

Glademaster:

No. No I don't think that I have ever experience this thing called split screen. I just decided to come on to a forum and bash it for no reason other than to troll people and look like an idiot. It isn't like if you don't have the right aspect ratio the screen is fucked up due to split and trying to find working controllers and batteries and then only having a limited amount of people to play aren't problems with it. Not to mention people being dicks and screen looking. Yes split screen really was the epitome of multiplayer gaming.

My point is you don't have to move anything around except maybe a controller.

No your point was I was an idiot.

If you say so.

I suppose it is. At the end of the day, it's nice to be doing something comfortably. I can't say playing downstairs on the settee wasn't a bad experience.

However then again, the control schemes of PC's and consoles differ a great deal, at least in the majority of usage, and thus require different ergonomics. Unless you're using a laptop, but sometimes touchpads can be a pain in the arse :S

Well this dissolved into the standard "YOU SUCK ELITIST!" "NO YOU SUCK FAIL-GAMER!" argument now didn't it?

They both have their pros and their cons.

Want to be able to get newer technology, with a lot of range of use and ability to customize? PC.

Want something that requires zero fuss, tech know-how and, most importantly, the reliability that any game you buy for it WILL RUN. PERIOD? Console.

Those are the only real reasons for me, anything else tends to be personal preference. Some people like having every game work on their controller, some like being able to swap between controller and mouse + keyboard.

Egg on, apply directly to the forehead! Thank you for that thought captcha.

idarkphoenixi:

VeneratedWulfen93:

idarkphoenixi:
Your argument is invalid. People can easily us a tv instead of a moniter for their pc and many pc games support the use of a 'gamepad'.

PC can do everything a console can and many more things that a console cannot do due to it's limitations as a platform. There's no question that PC is better, it's just more expensive and perhaps more complicated for the less tech minded people out there.

I'm relatively tech minded and believe I could put a good PC together. I could also afford one. I just prefer console gaming, its how I've been gaming since the 90s granted acknowledgement that obviously a PC is a more powerful system which I do play occasionally but only on strategy games like DoW 2. Its not that people "can't" build a PC its normally because they don't want to. Saying that every person who doesn't play PC is poor and has no knowledge of how a PC works is just plain ignorant.

If you want to make it a matter of personal opinion then someone else might say they prefer gaming on a DS, or playing on iPad apps. A debate like that will lead nowhere since you're essentially just going in circles. What I'm saying is that from a technical standpoint the pc is capable of everything that a console is and more. Fantastic games like the TW series are not put onto the console because it simply can't handle it and is limited by not having a keyboard and mouse.
At a logical point of view, the pc is better and most likely always will be simply because of what it's capable of. But we will always have personal preference and theres nothing wrong with that, some people like pepsi and some like coca cola.

I'm just stating my position. Total War would work on consoles, if you could use a keyboard and mouse on consoles anyway. Thats the only limitation for RTS the lack of a controller to be able to perform as a mouse does. Halo Wars did work on consoles and it controlled well, it lacked depth however and was pretty much a 'my first RTS'. I would love to see kinect implemented in a way in an RTS as if it was done well then it would be pretty awesome. One thing I will openly debate however is the comparison between games on both consoles and PC but that is not the focus of this thread.

Ultratwinkie:

way2sl0w:
Well I like consoles over PC's because of exclusives, split-screen, used games, PC's get shitty ports, unified achievements/trophy scores, and controllers. And I cannot possibly stress this part enough: Unless the PC game has native controller support (and not all do. Witcher, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Bioshock 2, Oblivion to name a few) trying to use controllers with PC games is such CRAPPY experience next to consoles!! yes, even with xpadder!

1. steam
2. steam
3. steam
4. steam
5. steam

Why bother with splitscreen when everything is on-line anyway? The only reason people use splitscreen was because internet access wasn't universal. However, 20 years later, internet is widely used.

Not to mention splitscreen relies on a very specific TV specs or else it looks terrible.

Steam does almost everything you ask and is the most widely used gaming platform in the world. Its user base is even larger than World Of Warcraft.

1. Steam showcases PC exclusives.
2. Steam tells you which game got bad reviews.
3. steam is so cheap used games are more expensive. I dare you to find a brand new Serious Sam: BFE for 10$. Especially since its AAA and was 10$ only a couple months after its release thanks to steam discounts and coupons.
4. steam has achievements, but why bother for virtual trophies?

Actually, if you live anywhere outside the or $ you're being ripped off by steam €60 is just ridiculous when you can get the same game for less than half that price other places

legendp:
Read below before answering poll

You guys do know you can use a controller on PC and plug your computer into the T.V and play on the couch.

The problem is that only about 10% of PC games actually do support using a controller though.

You can't really get fast paced arcadey games on PC. A la Dynasty Warriors. The only reason I still own and use consoles.

I play on both, and use a controller on both, so it's not a very good excuse, though the only excuse you need to play on one over the other is it's what you prefer. I think a more important question is will computer ever have same system multiplayer as good as a console, or even try to?

Wait... Is that it or is it that people dont say exactly what they mean and in this case have basically said it backwards.

There not really saying Couch and controller is better, as much as they are insinuating that for long term gaming sessions, keyboard/mouse and desk is far less comfortable, which that is essentially true but that hinges on the configuration of the PCs location.

Much like others have suggested, I too have an operational HTPC that allowed me to play from my couch the Old republic or any games in my gog or steam libraries and minecraft. I run xpad on the PC so I can use a controller on any game I wish, Or if I wish I can use the gamepad as a mouse replacement complete with more keyboard shortcuts than what is programable into a mouse. I can use a standard keyboard and mouse if the game I wish to play dictates, and I can even use a remote like mini keyboard and trackpad if the game warrants it. All from the comfort of the 10 foot GUI layout of a living room setting.

I have had a chair at a desk that rendered the concept of playing in a living room moot because the chair allowed me to comfortably rest long enough to give myself deep vein thrombosis it was so comfortable.

So yeah, the notion of not using a PC because of comfort is questionable any more and is clearly on the way out. However things like ease of operation, Ease of setting up Local multiplayer is more where it is favorable, but that distinction is going the way of the dinosaur too.

There are advantages to each. Hell in my home entertainment center I have a 360, PS3, AND the HTPC for limited gaming and honestly, that doesnt even account for my actual gaming PC. Id say within the next 10 years this sort of configuration will be much more common as HDTVs continue to become more standardized and as people start to realize how cheaply you can get things like refurbished desktops or secondary PCs these days.

Ultratwinkie:

Why bother with splitscreen when everything is on-line anyway? The only reason people use splitscreen was because internet access wasn't universal. However, 20 years later, internet is widely used.

Not to mention splitscreen relies on a very specific TV specs or else it looks terrible.

Not just picking on you here but you just happened to say it, but why to people have this quite ridiculous idea that no one using splitscreen. In my house, both university and home, splitscreen is still used, in fact it's often a make or break factor if the game gets brought. Oh and please don't say the only reason for splitscreen is the lack of the internet, please don't.

Seriously do your self a favour find 4 friends several bottles of something very intoxicating, a splitscreen games, smash bros or black ops work well and a night without something important in the morning, devise some rules, more silly the better and have your self a drinking game. Then you will see the point in splitscreen and no doing this online is not the same thing..... no do not even think it.

That's if your old enough of course, I was *cough *cough.

legendp:

StriderShinryu:
I don't see why it wouldn't be a valid issue. Most people already have their consoles connected to their TVs in front of couches and their PCs located on desks in offices, bedrooms, etc. It's easy enough to say "hey, you don't have to do it that way. Just do this or buy that and it can work!" but it's still unnecessary trouble and/or expense that not everyone wants to deal with. Much like with the rest of the PC VS Console debate, convenience and cost are probably two of the most common reasons why people choose to game on a console.

But wouldn't that an argument be for convenience and price, the point is it is possible, and the way many people talk about it they make it out as if it is impossible (without mention it's impossible). It feels like it comes back to conveinance, moving a desktop only requires 3 cables, power, video and audio, so I find it easy to move a desktop. Even though I have a 360, but if theres a game on PC for a $1 and it's $12 on console than I would rather buy the PC version and spend 5mins moving my desktop.

Perhaps I should have added an "only for T.V" or "only for Controller" in the poll, I am hearing good points for T.V debate but have yet to hear any good reasons why one cannot use there controller on a computer

It's not an argument for it simply because it means extra work and/or cost. It's not a huge cost or a huge amount of extra work for most people with modern PCs and modern TVs, but it's something extra that has to be done/purchased. It's extra effort not required if you already have your console connected to your TV, as most do, and your PC somewhere else connected to a monitor, as most do.

Matthew94:

And the "cheapness" of consoles is entirely false due to the price of games, peripherals and for some people, online.

I agree with your continuous pushing of PC not being as expensive as some people say it is, but you're not quite correct here and you're also missing my point. My point is that, if someone already has both a console and a PC, and have them set up as the vast majority of people do, it's extra cost and effort to change the way they are set up. I'm not talking about day 1 costs (which are still less for console than PC though not by the multiplier too many give), I'm talking costs right now to go from current set up to playing PC in the living room.

vxicepickxv:

Mimsofthedawg:

Da Orky Man:

No. Just no. Online is NOT a replacement for splitscreen. Can you really say that playing aginst some faceless guy who may or may not even be on a mic is equal to playing against someone sitting next to you? Not all gamers are antisocial enough to not have any friends they can bear to be in the same room as.

it has nothing to do with being anti social - I just like all 1080 pixels to be MINE!

1080p doesn't stand for 1080 pixels. The P stands for progressive scan.

As for the original topic, why not both? I can hook my PC or console up to the main TV set to do whatever I feel like. Hulu, netflix, escapist HD videos, and gaming.

I can hook controllers up to the PC, or the PS3, and do pretty much whatever. They both have good uses, so, why even ask this question?

did I say 1080p? Oh that's right, I didn't. 1080 PIXELS are on one side of a television while 1920 PIXELS are on the other side.
I suppose in all technicality, I could have said, "2,073,600 Pixels" but that just seemed excessive and I figured people would understand what I'm saying...

And then a troll had to come a long and om nom my post.

StriderShinryu:

Matthew94:

And the "cheapness" of consoles is entirely false due to the price of games, peripherals and for some people, online.

I agree with your continuous pushing of PC not being as expensive as some people say it is, but you're not quite correct here and you're also missing my point. My point is that, if someone already has both a console and a PC, and have them set up as the vast majority of people do, it's extra cost and effort to change the way they are set up. I'm not talking about day 1 costs (which are still less for console than PC though not by the multiplier too many give), I'm talking costs right now to go from current set up to playing PC in the living room.

Ah, in that case then yes I would agree with you there.

legendp:
Read below before answering poll

Something that I have been noticing a lot (well I have always noticed it), is that whenever a pc vs console debate comes up people usually use a reason for preferring Console over PC is that they prefer to sit on a couch and use a controller. I have even seen people say this on the escapist, and it really annoys me. You guys do know you can use a controller on PC and plug your computer into the T.V and play on the couch. Now this is not a debate over whether or not console or PC is better. consoles are great for convenience, they're cheap and easy to use, and they have many great exclusives but the excuse "I prefer a controller" or "I prefer to be on the couch" should not fly because you can do both those on a computer, just plug it into the T.V and plug a controller in (now I know it works both ways, you can use a mouse and keyboard on console using 3rd party hardware if you choose and plug your console into a monitor).

So my question is do you think controller or T.V should be reason for playing on console or pc

Personally my answer is no. it should not be a reason for debate in what you prefer, I know everyone is entitled to there own opinion (I mean this in it's self is an opinion) but saying "I prefer console because of a controller" just feels narrow minded (in my opinion). what do you guys think, am I being arrogant and narrow-minded myself, am I overacting. Are they're any other excuses that annoy you when someone ses they're preferred hardware to play games on. I apologize if I have offended anyone, (Keep in mind that I think both console and Pc are good to game on).

Edit: for example you could use this card to transmit a wireless signal to T.V, I don't know about other options. You don't have to move your computer
http://www.guru3d.com/news/galaxy-outs-slick-nvidia-gtx460-with-wireless-tv-connectivity/

Edit 2: Aright there some good points for not wanting to move your computer to a T.V but what about using a controller debate

Edit 3: ok, so this seems to have gotten a lot of attention, and A few (alright a lot) seem upset about the forum name. I apologise if the word excuses came accross as a bit strong, I should have said reasons, I will change it.

Why would I use my computer to imitate a console when I can just buy the console? I like the division myself. I do my schoolwork on my computer and it's tough for me to relax when using it, no matter what I use for a moniter. With the console though, it's all about having fun, so it's easier for me to chill.

Mimsofthedawg:

vxicepickxv:

Mimsofthedawg:

it has nothing to do with being anti social - I just like all 1080 pixels to be MINE!

1080p doesn't stand for 1080 pixels. The P stands for progressive scan.

As for the original topic, why not both? I can hook my PC or console up to the main TV set to do whatever I feel like. Hulu, netflix, escapist HD videos, and gaming.

I can hook controllers up to the PC, or the PS3, and do pretty much whatever. They both have good uses, so, why even ask this question?

did I say 1080p? Oh that's right, I didn't. 1080 PIXELS are on one side of a television while 1920 PIXELS are on the other side.
I suppose in all technicality, I could have said, "2,073,600 Pixels" but that just seemed excessive and I figured people would understand what I'm saying...

And then a troll had to come a long and om nom my post.

...and this is why I hate new standard HD terminology. 1080x1920 is 1080x1920, and progressive scan was standard long before HD was even a thing. Anyone using an interlaced scan since LCDs became standard would get a funny look. 1080? Inaccurate. p? Unnecessary. I'd put an on-topic qualifier here, but I'm pretty sure this conversation has been dead for years.

I don't see how it's valid given that they are interchangeable. You can play a PC on a TV from a couch.

That said, TVs are nowhere near the resolution of a monitor (FYI I use the term to mean "pixel density" like it's supposed to, not the actual quantity of pixels) and laying back on a couch is going to lower performance when it counts (like intense online gaming).

As for controllers, well, sorta. I use my PS3 controller on my PC all the time - most recently for Alan Wake - but I also get the M+K for shooters which is far superior than a thumbstick. So, console is at a disadvantage there.

But really... the main difference as far as gaming goes is graphics. And availability of games (at whatever price point). If that matters to you then there's only 1 choice.

Breadline:

Racecarlock:
Ok, I won't use an excuse. I just prefer playing on consoles and if you don't like that, tough shit. I don't see why I should have to explain my preferences to people who will just insult or condescend me over them. But seriously, fuck off and just let me play the way I want to.

I swear in all these threads you're usually the first person to get noticeably upset. And in threads that specifically relate to PCs you always seem to be one of the first to turn it into some PC elitist issue.

After a while I started realizing the reason I'd always notice your avatar was because you are often the first person to get vehemently defensive about your preference towards consoles.

It's often enough to be a pattern. You are part of the problem, not the solution, understand that hate only begets more hate.

Again sorry. But I've actually been called deluded before. Deluded. It was in either the witcher 2 ZP comments section or an "Are consoles destroying the industry" thread. He was just so preachy. Like the PC was some kind of deity and he was some kind of clergy and I was some kind of peasant. As a result, I get mad and defensive about this stuff because in my mind I think if I don't, someone's going to start calling me a dirty peasant again. I don't mean to turn these into shouting matches or anything. I don't want flame wars. I just don't want people insulting me over playing on a console again.

ZombieGenesis:
I'm sorry what? I don't understand this thread...

Both my PC and my console are hooked up to my TV, have controller ports and are within distance of my bed/seats.

What am I being asked here exactly?

QFT

Games are games, even if it's on a frikken calculator, and it was a good game I would still play it.

I have both a bunch of consoles, and a PC, and I game on both. Platform fanboyism is worthless, because all you are doing is limiting the games you will play, and will not play. There are a lot of great console exclusives, and a lot of great PC exclusives as well, so why not enjoy both worlds?

It doesn't cost the world either, a Semi Decent PC (which you would use for other things as well as gaming), and one console of your choice isn't much if you are serious about Gaming.

Each has it's benefeits. I don't prefer my couch over my desk chair, or vice versa. However, I do think that FPS's are a bit better on PC than on consoles, it's just that my PC has trouble running some newer games, primarily lag in open areas. Not a whole lot of lag, but enough to be a minor annoyance (this was with Deus Ex: Human Revolution on it's default settings, which might be the highest settings, I don't know, I couldn't figure out how to change them, the in game setup window was really confusing)
However, for 3rd person action games, I couldn't see how I'd play it on PC. Take God of War (or Dante's Inferno, AKA God of War for Xbox focusing on a different epic poem about a different religion). I could not possibly see how a mouse and keyboard would fit to all the different buttons needed for the possible attacks and combos. Even moving around would be a pain. Consoles also have the benefeit of being pick up and play, where you don't HAVE to worry about all of the little technical things. I also like having a physical copy of the games I get, but that's not too big of an issue. Same reason I'd rather have paper books than eBooks.
Also, for the whole Splitscreen thing, I find it much more enjoyable to play in the same room with a friend than with someone over the internet, and because many people online (especially on consoes, but PC has quite a few as well) are complete assholes.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I'm sure this will remain to be a source of bitching for a long time to come, but what isn't on the internet? For whatever reason you give as to why you think this, there will be someone who will smack you hand and yell "NNOOO! YHEEUR RONG!!! THYS IS TE ONLI ANSUR THEAR IS!!!", and then someone will come along and smack that person's hands and say "NHEAU, STEWPED! IT'S ACKSHUALE-" someone smacks their hands, then another, then another...

legendp:
just plug it into the T.V and plug a controller in

That's just the point, I don't want to plug my laptop into my TV every time I get home, be it wired or wireless. Part of it is that I sometimes want to do something other with my TV when gaming. And it just feels stupid having my laptop on my desk, my TV across the room and me on my couch in yet another corner. I don't like the hassle. And hassle is one of the main reasons I quit PC gaming in the first place. Also, strategy games with a controller? Good luck with that.

Maybe not very strong reasoning, I know, but then again, sitting on a couch is not the only reason for me to prefer console gaming.

I'm mainly a PC gamer but
1) Your computer requires a keyboard connected to get past POST.

2) You're going to need a keyboard and mouse to launch those games. My living room would make for an incredibly awkward setup in regards to this. I would need like a 12 foot keyborad and mouse wire, or a wireless one which I hate.

3) Most people are going to have to move the computer to their living room. This is just a weird spot for it, because when I'm done gaming I want my PERSONAL COMPUTER to remain, well, personal.

The couch reason is quite a bit more legitimate, as it goes hand in hand with the ease of use argument.

You will definitely have an easier time setting up a console for couch use than a PC. And if sitting on the couch is that big an issue, then it seems perfectly legitimate.

But the controller argument doesn't really seem very good for me. In fact, PCs have superior controller support than consoles do. You have a wider variety of controllers (flight sticks for example), and if you're a PC gamer, IMO you're missing out if you are limited to a mouse and keyboard. Poor controller support is a valid counter argument to that, but that would also go hand in hand with the ease of use argument, since there are ways around the poor controller support (...sorta).

Well... I have a console right now hooked up to my TV that came with all the cables and 1 controller. With PC, I have to buy the cable, buy the controller, synch and configure the controller, and set my computer to use my TV as a monitor. The big reason the consoles win there: convenience. BUT if you already have all the stuff and get it configured, it's all the same, so whatever. Consoles win here by the slimmest of margins. To go further would be to open the debate of which is better overall, which I'm honestly mixed over in my opinion.

For me the subject is one of interior decoration, not technical platforms. In order to play games on a couch one needs a screen with a suitable size, and suitable input methods. Whether the box has a Sony sticker or Coolermaster sticker matters little to me.

Consoles, PCs, phones, tablets, they are all basically interchangable computers. We have our input devices, output devices and processing units. I'd prefer if these were completely interchangable but unfortunately the industry sometimes likes to make artificial limitations. Like making computers that can only run that company's prefered software. Sony and Apple tend to be the main culprits so I like to avoid their hardware.

If my stereo could only play CDs from one specific record company, I'd buy a more versatile solution. But in the world of gaming we accept similar artifical limitations. Lets stop doing that and expect the right of choice as consumers.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked