Nah, I`m not winding anybody up, I`m just saying that in my opinion there are no good reasons to buy a console (yet). Close to none of the games I enjoy exist on a console, since I mainly play simulators.

And to base quality on sales figures ... uhm ... I guess that makes The Sims something close to the pyramids. And Spice Girls will be compared to Mozart in 200 years?

And why are people fanboys when they like something over something else? I dont wear anti-console tshirts, I just hate the sit-down-in-your-couch-and-master-this-in-two-minutes-before-supper-is-ready mentality of casual gaming.

LOL, fair enough mate.

I agree simulators are very scarce on consoles, much to my disappointment but I enjoy GT & Drift (< not really a sim ;)) and I'm looking forward to the IL2 Birds of Prey coming soon.

However, generalizing console games as 99/98% bad due to the lack of simulations is akin to saying that PC games are 90% bad for the same reason (probably more).

Regards sales. Yes, I have to agree with you, sales do not determine whether a game is 'good' or 'bad' is only signifies it's popularity, however, sales do provide an indication of how good a game is, following it's immediate release, in that strong sales later in the game's life indicate the quality of that title.

I never use the 'Fanboy' name in a derogatory way, Hell, I'm both:D. I even made a huge argument (on another forum) that the word should be auto censored due to too many people believing it to be an insult. So no offense ment.:up:

Hehe! When I talk about why pc is better than console, I`m talking about personal preference, of course. Its not science.

Thus pc is best, and all who disagree must make love to a troll. Okay?

:rotfl:<Raises hand>

I'm speaking from a professional perspective! PC rule!

An example - PC's offer more in the way of hardware for a designer to work with. Consoles are automatically limited by memory right out of the box, so designing games on it, you are already level limited on size right out of the gate. There are a ton of factors on top of this, but I don't have the energy to delve into it at the moment.

So you know if a game is being designed for both the PC and Console at the same time, you already know right away that it has its legs chopped off at the knees.

-S

One hand is enough :yep:.

You must have a whole lot of fingers.:D

This is the reason why I hate consoles: Without them, and the dreadful porting over, on the PC we would have slick interfaces, which make use of high resolutions and powerful input devices. Instead we get this:

http://www.madshrimps.be/upload/B|ow...uip%20menu.JPG

Now how can consoles be more advanced than PCs, as some people were trying to convince of me during the "NexGen" hype?

A huge majority of games are bastardizing our computers. A good example is how the Morrowind interface was so much better than Oblivion, owing to NexGen and the 360.

I HATE ALL COMPUTER GAMES. :arrgh!:

That's why I upgrade rig and harass my local Ganestop with "WHERE;S MY G#& D%$#@ GAME AT!!!

It's a sickness I don't want a cure for. :p

Don't get me started on those occasional...upgrade frenzies....

It's not consoles ruining your PC experience, it's lazy developers looking for a quick dollar on multi-platform titles.

Learn the difference.

I agree. Games should be optimized for a given platform. I'm hating the dumbed down one size fits all as of late. This is the very reason that PC Gamers just aren't buying software anymore. Besides, why would I want one of these protection schemes that screws up my computer when I can buy the same game in looks and feel for my damn console?

I could go on ranting all day long, but one thing the developers have forgotten - the PC Gamer is a much more 'sophisticated' gamer and can spot crap titles a mile away. This is the real reason PC Gaming is on a decline.

-S

"Now how can consoles be more advanced than PCs, as some people were trying to convince of me during the "NexGen" hype?"

Dont worry. All the new consoles and handhelds are in development at the moment. the PS4, wii 2 and xbox 7 somit that their on about will bring even more headaches to the pc v console debate :shifty:

Not long till the next "NextGen" hype :doh:

The quality of a piece of software is not entirely subjective. There are logical reasons why some things are desirable although usually our rubrics differ somewhat. I think "realistic" is such a bastardized word in the sim/hardcore game crowd. The word is basically inserted without critical thought because that's what people want to see.

On the other hand the word "fun" gets used too much as the antithesis of "hard" or "complex." "Fun" and "brain dead easy" are almost synonyms. "Accessible" is the corporate version. Not always is a minimap with all enemies marked on it, infinite ammo, constant hollywood explosions, teh c00l shiz, etc making the game more fun. It's hard to have a conversation about games with someone that doesn't realize that more stuff, less thinking, and greater ease in a game can detract from the satisfaction. Entertainment is a very broad definition and people need to learn that.

Consoles make money, are well optimized for the hardware, are "accessible", etc but I stand by my stance that consoles ruin otherwise very satisfying games. Rainbow Six (#1) vs Lockdown anyone? Sure the graphics are better and the animations more fluid but they have secretly drained away all the thinking, the challenge, the tension.

There are of course many games that belong on a console. Katamari Demacy, Guitar Hero, JRPGs are all lovely on a console. I have never ever ever ever loaded up a "sim" on a console and been pleasantly surprised by its depth. Forza/GranTurismo are excelent driving games but utter crap racing games.

While most people don't want the kind of depth that I do, the developers are partly to blame for underestimating people's intelligence. How long do you think the average console game "learn time" is by design? That is how long from sitting down and turning it on to being good enough to play it. 5 minutes? 10 minutes? And they wonder why we seem to have such short attention spans. It's too short! If I'm as good as I'm ever going to be in 10 minutes, the game is too simple. Welcome to the land of instant gratification and ADD.

Hear, hear!

Word.

Personally, I also find myself irritated by short, unreplayable games. Doesn't matter if it is easy or hard. Something about beating a game in one day just really irks me. It's cool if it has replayability you know? Like an addictive game, like having a different experience each time. That's why online play, open ended games, and skirmish modes are so fun. They're never really over until you feel like you had enough.

When a game is heavily scripted and linear, that's it. You beat it once and it's done. Like a movie. Just put it back on your shelf and remember if fondly. Don't get me wrong, some of these games can be very good. Recently I played Condemned and Call of Cthulhu. Absolutely no replayability and they were beat in a pretty short amount of time, but they were good. The Call of Duty SP campaigns can be very enjoyable, but I can't imagine anybody playing them much more than once.

In the end I guess it's about value. Why pay $40-$50 for a game I beat in 1-2 days and never play again. When I can pay $40-$50 for another game that will be played for months or even years?

If only we could rent pc games.

But I guess that's all just me:doh:


ps. I can't actually beat Call of Cthulhu. There seems to be some annoying bug at the very end that prevents me from finishing the game.

I beat Call of Cthulhu. Get a walkthrough if its that much trouble.. I can remember feeling like I couldn't beat Fallout 2 since I needed some thing (something about the ship nav system) that I forgot was in my inventory and I didn't relate the two because it looked like a tankers helmet or something. Make sure this isn't happening to you as well. You can sometimes fix these poblems by taking a breather. I came back after taking a couple days off and smacked myself up side the head because I had the thing I was looking for all that time already! I just left it in the trunk of the car!

-S

Ilpalazzo, guess what I'm playing now? Falcon 4.0, a game out of 1996 or 1998 or something. Why? Because they used generated content. It allows awesome coop scenarios, lends itself to hours and hours of learning, has the full range of tension, and is not afraid to be a little hard.

This is why I like Silent Hunter, because I get a feeling of connection with something larger than a video game. I'm experiencing a piece of history, doing what they are doing. It's not a ride on rails but a chess board in front of me and it's my move. Jet-powered U-boats and scripted missions where you nuke-torpedo a time-traveled US modern air craft carrier... I would stop playing. The second the game disconnects itself from what makes it meaningful, that's the second that the prettiest graphics, biggest explosions, most scripted "coincidences" of cool things become meaningless.

Anyone can make a big explosion or impossible fighting moves in software, that doesn't impress me. Bigger or faster is not praiseworthy. Using the tools at your disposal to tell a meaningful story is what makes a good game good. By story I mean the whole message and feeling.

edited and added some ranting

OOOOOOh Falcon. My friend tried to get me into a game called Falcon Allied Force. Is that the same game? I was so caught up in IL2 at the time that I didn't feel like learning another sim. It did look good though. Played very smoothly.

Yes! Generated content! Akella's PT Boats game is gonna suck because they went with scripted missions. Yeah, I said it's going to suck, I haven't played it. So what.

I like how you mentioned (and bolded) coop. Where are all the coop games anyway? Sometimes I just want to play with a few friends and not have to find a full public server to have fun you know? Last game I remember playing coop with a couple dudes and having fun was some sort of Vietnam game. I forget the name. I want coop Thief 4. Sheez I want just about any game with a singleplayer campaign to have coop. My father even wanted to play coop Silent Hunter with me. We tried mp, but it was too contained feeling. We would love to patrol together. Maybe coop the same sub or something, I dunno. Just seems like there's coop fun to be had in most any game and nobody cares enough for it. Majority rule I guess.


hope this next part isn't a big spoiler to anybody


About Cthulhu, I tried this same part about 11 times. It's what I believe to be very close to the end of the game. It is when you have to make it through the place while it is collapsing because of the submarine attack. I received a tip to try it without strafing and lowering the resolution. Anyway, at the exact same part every time, no matter how fast I went through, I get game over. Do you know what part I'm talking about? WTF am I supposed to do. There is no sprint button. Could I actually be like a millisecond off and get game over? I just don't see how I can get there any faster. I always lose on the same part. I saw video of somebody completing it. He went through exactly as I did. I just don't understand why the game decides to kill me on this same part every time.

I have heard of many others having the same difficulty on that part. I just assumed it was bugged and let off it for a while.

Good rant. I agree. I don't mind a little fantasy as long as the game doesn't try to sell itself as realistic. When I get into something that I'm not expecting, and that doesn't involve an awesome story, its game over!

I expect Doom 3 or 4 to be not so realistic. I buy that for the story. I expect a Falcon 4.0 AF to be realistic. I buy that for the learning! :up: If it's not realistic when I expect it to be, it's probably headed for the garbage bin - and I will warn anyone that talks about it what i found - guaranteed!

-S