Why I don't play PC games.

[BlueMage]

See, that's the thing - I've never encountered it. Ever. As far as I'm concerned, it's a non-issue.

[irriadin]

In a few years you will. IMO, supporting stuff like DRM & high hardware costs does not justify that.

Although I have to say, I'm incredibly tempted to buy a bunch of parts for a desktop I configured for $1200 from Newegg earlier today, including stuff like a 22" LCD monitor & a 750 GB hard drive, that should run most games just fine...at least for a few years.

Well, I don't find DRM to be as much of an issue for games as it is for movies and other forms of entertainment. I've never had an issue related to DRM in games. Also, the thought of refusing to buy new hardware simply because it's too expensive is somewhat ridiculous. They do sell mid-range and budget cards, you know. Not everyone has to buy an 8800GTX to play PC games.

[Bahamut]

Well, I don't find DRM to be as much of an issue for games as it is for movies and other forms of entertainment. I've never had an issue related to DRM in games. Also, the thought of refusing to buy new hardware simply because it's too expensive is somewhat ridiculous. They do sell mid-range and budget cards, you know. Not everyone has to buy an 8800GTX to play PC games.

Just the principle of DRM is what I disagree with, although I've had plenty of issues with DRM across the board (even back in the SNES era on the SNES at times). There are plenty of stories out there with issues about DRM in games such as forcing people to reinstall Windows (a more extreme example). Or a more closer to home example, the ridiculousness of not being able allowed to play Bioshock if it's your brother's copy and you have a different user name on the computer. Even worse, acceptance of these limitations has a tendency to encourage companies to go a step further, which is something that should be done without.

I do know about cheap video cards - I swear by $100 ones since anything more is a bit outrageous to pay for. However, the price of keeping up with all the components to have full access to the range is quite an expense for frankly not terribly many new games I feel is worth playing - the cream of the crop for PC games tend to keep the requirements much more reasonable anyway. For example, Doom 3 when it came out - I had a desktop I paid $1400 for 7 months beforehand, and it couldn't run it past 5 frames per second. Such games are shining examples of the inexcusable philosophy amongst some game developers that make PC gaming extraordinarily expensive to keep up just to play certain games.

[I-n-j-i-n]

Hahahaha, hahahahaha, haahaha. Never tried to play Guitar Hero 3 out of the box, did you?

Perhaps not hardware upgrades, but this latest batch of consoles suffer all the same software upgrade limitations.

"perhaps not hardware upgrades".

Wow. Thanks for proving ALL my points.

And taking 5 seconds for auto-downloading/updating patch is nothing compared to manual patching you typically SHOULD do for optimal performance for most PC patches. Console updates are inconsequential. Period.

Another deal with PC gaming, for me, is that you typically can't get reimbursed for software problems, troubleshoots and downloaded content. The customer support for those tends to be either horrendous or basically nonexistent. Compare that to getting a new PS3 or 360 if they have internal problems and getting it delivered back, I think that's one huge plus for console games. It's just a lot easier to insure as an actual gaming hardware.

[OverCoat]

the ridiculousness of not being able allowed to play Bioshock if it's your brother's copy and you have a different user name on the computer.

You could always just crack it. You own the game, you're just... modding it

[The Coop]

For example, Doom 3 when it came out - I had a desktop I paid $1400 for 7 months beforehand, and it couldn't run it past 5 frames per second.

...

What kind of specs were on that thing, and what kind of horrific overcharging were you hit with?

When Doom 3 was released in 2004, I had my current PC (XP HE, P4 3.0GHz), with 512MB of cheapy RAM, and an AGP Radeon 9800 Pro... and I got somewhere between 25-45fps usually with the settings on High, and a reso of 1024x768.

[Bigfoot]

Yeah, Doom 3 wasn't THAT demanding. I played it using a 9600SE(slow edition). It ran like crap until I bought an extra 512mb of RAM to give me a total of 1gig, the it ran smooth as hell.

[ContraBass Black]

After years of lurking and listening, this thread has drawn me out into the light.

The main reason I play PC games is one I don't see mentioned here. The PC platform lends itself to more complexity of play and control.

My primary example is MechWarrior 4. To play it, I use almost every key on my keyboard and several combinations. With my right hand, I steer and aim. With my left hand, I manage weapons, throttle, cameras, night vision, cooling, mission computer, IFF computer, radar, communication, jump jets, and power. The Battletech console game, MechAssault, offers little of that piloting detail, nor of the customization and other game elements. It wouldn't be at all practical with the number of buttons on a console controller.

There are other reasons I play PC games. RTS games also lend themselves to keyboard and mouse. I like games with mod communities, and refuse to pay for online play.I already have a PC, and it's good for things other than games.

The PC game market is waning, and ports of console games tend to carry all of the shortcomings of consoles, pick up none of the benefits of PC's, and have extra muddled controls and performance on top of that. Because of that, the games I play most, MechWarrior 4 and Need For Speed 4 and 5 are several years old and had dedicated PC development teams. Their online play made it easier to meet, converse, and play again with people than the games that followed, which is why today, long after their some of their sequels have died, their online play continues with fan-established matchmaking servers and mods.

[OverCoat]

The main reason I play PC games is one I don't see mentioned here. The PC platform lends itself to more complexity of play and control

Ah yes, sim games

gotta love those. Though there's not enough new good mech games out these days. Or combat flight sims.

[Bahamut]

...

What kind of specs were on that thing, and what kind of horrific overcharging were you hit with?

When Doom 3 was released in 2004, I had my current PC (XP HE, P4 3.0GHz), with 512MB of cheapy RAM, and an AGP Radeon 9800 Pro... and I got somewhere between 25-45fps usually with the settings on High, and a reso of 1024x768.

I got it when Dell had a legendary sale (in terms of how much was discounted), and quickly after bought a video card for it. The computer has been good for most other games for a while...but games like Doom 3 were too much. Games like Half Life 2 & WoW performed greatly though.

[Sir_NutS]

I got it when Dell had a legendary sale (in terms of how much was discounted), and quickly after bought a video card for it. The computer has been good for most other games for a while...but games like Doom 3 were too much. Games like Half Life 2 & WoW performed greatly though.

uh wut? when doom3 came out i played it on decent settings with a really, really shitty video card for the time, and hey, HL2 and Doom3 shared almost the same system requirements...

I don't know how paying for such a expensive pc got you so shitty results. Maybe you didn't know wtf you were getting. Do some research first. And this is why we don't buy WHOLE PCs, we just upgrade what's necessary. Your arguments are getting ridiculous as no one who spends 1400 on a pc right now wouldn't be able to get cutting-edge games like crysis or COD4 running on decent settings.

But yeah, another thing about PC games: ever tried to play your favorite NES game on an xbox360? oh yeah you can't. Unless you have a Wii. But even then you have to plug it and pay for the game you bought years ago, again, to download it and play it on a different setup than when you played it on your old rusty NES. But hey guess what, I was just playing Leisure Suit Larry and monkey Island last night. On my actual PC, not the old IBM 386 I had when i used to play these. I didn't have to pay for them again, I didn't have to switch consoles, just install and play, and they played exactly how they used to back then. Backwards compatibility on consoles? meh.

[Bahamut]

uh wut? when doom3 came out i played it on decent settings with a really, really shitty video card for the time, and hey, HL2 and Doom3 shared almost the same system requirements...

I don't know how paying for such a expensive pc got you so shitty results. Maybe you didn't know wtf you were getting. Do some research first. And this is why we don't buy WHOLE PCs, we just upgrade what's necessary. Your arguments are getting ridiculous as no one who spends 1400 on a pc right now wouldn't be able to get cutting-edge games like crysis or COD4 running on decent settings.

I wasn't the only one who had issues - I knew plenty who did and they knew what they were doing. My video card was a cheap $100 ATI Radeon 9200 at the time, and probably was what was the downside (it sported a P4 2.66 Ghz CPU, 1 or 2 GB of RAM - I forget -, and other nice stuff), but I wasn't about to shell out close to as much as a console for a video card to play a game built with a ridiculous philosophy in mind. And again, I'm looking to potentially buy a computer atm that I configured (building from scratch) for $1200 that should be pretty solid for games & have the ridiculous hard drive space I crave. I miss PC gaming (& Windows oddly enough), but the cost of entry is potentially prohibitive for me atm.

But yeah, another thing about PC games: ever tried to play your favorite NES game on an xbox360? oh yeah you can't. Unless you have a Wii. But even then you have to plug it and pay for the game you bought years ago, again, to download it and play it on a different setup than when you played it on your old rusty NES. But hey guess what, I was just playing Leisure Suit Larry and monkey Island last night. On my actual PC, not the old IBM 386 I had when i used to play these. I didn't have to pay for them again, I didn't have to switch consoles, just install and play, and they played exactly how they used to back then. Backwards compatibility on consoles? meh.

Piracy should not be included as a legitimate argument...especially on OCR of all places.

[AMT]

Piracy should not be included as a legitimate argument...especially on OCR of all places.

He's not talking about piracy. Both of his examples were old PC games. He's saying that he can play old PC games on his current PC; I can play Commander Keen, Doom, Starcraft, Half-Life, Unreal Tournament, Morrowind, Doom 3, Half-Life 2, Oblivion, and Crysis all on one machine. Consoles can't do that for the most part.

[Bahamut]

He's not talking about piracy. Both of his examples were old PC games. He's saying that he can play old PC games on his current PC; I can play Commander Keen, Doom, Starcraft, Half-Life, Unreal Tournament, Morrowind, Doom 3, Half-Life 2, Oblivion, and Crysis all on one machine. Consoles can't do that for the most part.

Oh, I misread it when I saw a mention of NES. That is true, although personally, I rarely go back to older games - there's just too many newer games that get neglected as it is.

[BlueMage]

"perhaps not hardware upgrades".

Wow. Thanks for proving ALL my points.

I did nothing of the sort - it's not a point of contention that console hardware does not require upgrading as PC hardware does. However, the console traditionally required NO upgrades, software or otherwise, nor online activations, nor anything else of the like. Simply, this means that if anything, PCs and consoles now share a similar limitation.

And taking 5 seconds for auto-downloading/updating patch is nothing compared to manual patching you typically SHOULD do for optimal performance for most PC patches. Console updates are inconsequential. Period.

Bullshit. Patching a modded X360 leads to a useless X360. Hardly inconsequential. Yet some games require that update. I'm sorry, what was that about not requiring upgrades?

Another deal with PC gaming, for me, is that you typically can't get reimbursed for software problems, troubleshoots and downloaded content. The customer support for those tends to be either horrendous or basically nonexistent. Compare that to getting a new PS3 or 360 if they have internal problems and getting it delivered back, I think that's one huge plus for console games. It's just a lot easier to insure as an actual gaming hardware.

I'm going to point out that it seems to be a far more likely if in the case of the X360 and PS3 vs most PC hardware. And it's more the way you approach the issue of your warranty. To date, I've never been screwed over on warranty for any of my PC hardware in the long-run.

[Least100Seraphs]

Modding a machine is done largely (almost solely, these days) for the purpose of piracy or cheating - and if you mod your machine then you are agreeing to the risks. It's not like MS has surprised or tricked you with their online service, either. They make it clear in the ToS that only unmodified machines are authorised to go on the Xbox Live service.

[big giant circles]

i'm fairly indifferent. i can aim infinitely better with a mouse than i can with thumbsticks. that's my only logic.

[uthlu]

This seems almost like asking "is xbox or Gamecube better?" Both consoles and PCs have their own ups and downs -- and their own set of exclusive games. I've yet to see a Mario game on the PC, but it would also be hard to include a good RTS game on a console. Likewise, having more options CAN be a good thing (being able to select any type of unit in Rise of Nations with a single key), but simplicity also has it's advantages (Devil May Cry 3 has an awesome battle system -- with only a few buttons used). While you don't have to upgrade a console, and are guaranteed that games for it WILL work, you do have to buy a completely new system when the next gen comes out. Depending on what you plan on getting, it can be pricey if you get it immediately. However, PCs don't have that clearcut next-gen line, and you can usually keep the bulk of your hardware when upgrading, even though this means you aren't always guaranteed a game for PC will work on your PC (my onboard graphics card was powerful enough to run Doom 3 stat-wise, but proved incompatible). The same goes for the bulk of PC games as well -- moddability and patchability. If you buy a console game with a terminal glitch, you're generally stuck.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it all comes down to what you prefer.

And I'm a bit more of a console fan, though I also have my fair share of good PC games too.

[I-n-j-i-n]

I did nothing of the sort - it's not a point of contention that console hardware does not require upgrading as PC hardware does. However, the console traditionally required NO upgrades, software or otherwise, nor online activations, nor anything else of the like. Simply, this means that if anything, PCs and consoles now share a similar limitation.

No they don't. Auto updates that does everything for you with perfect function is not even close to the amount of updating we all had to do for PC games since the Doom days. Also, you don't need to log online for almost no console games except for something like Phantasy Star Universe. That isn't much of a point to make. So a few console games are like PC games. But with almost none of the similar hassles otherwise.

Bullshit. Patching a modded X360 leads to a useless X360. Hardly inconsequential. Yet some games require that update. I'm sorry, what was that about not requiring upgrades?

I never said anything about modding. And since when was modding consoles ever a necessary experience? Never.

I'm going to point out that it seems to be a far more likely if in the case of the X360 and PS3 vs most PC hardware. And it's more the way you approach the issue of your warranty. To date, I've never been screwed over on warranty for any of my PC hardware in the long-run.

Statistically, the console problems are way overblown. Even at the worst times for the 360, the statistics were approximately at the MOST, 2% of all the millions of consoles. And the vast majority of them were eligible for refund or replacement. Compare that to the constant problems most PCs face no matter how much you try to avoid them (my CD/DVD player exploding. Literally EXPLODING was pretty spectacular. I never came across anything like that with any consoles, ever). And that's not mentioning the neverending stream of viral attacks even when I'm running three virus/spam detectors at once.

I don't see this as any sort of bashing for PC games. It's just reality. I still lean towards console games as THE gaming systems, but I'm in no way bashing PC games. But if you're in it only to play games, it is for a fact more of a hassle than just opening a box and plugging a system in.

I mean, look at it the other way, and it's for a fact that console games aren't as easy to openly modify or manipulate using a controller compared to the keyboard (not a bash on controllers since I prefer them. It's just not as complex that's all). Both have their pros and cons that way. And by the numbers, the vast majority of gamers steer towards console gaming for a reason. I doubt they do that because 'games are simpulrrr hurrrr'.

[Ferret]

I'd still like to at least have the left half of a keyboard and a trackball for playing FPSes. It's just what I'm used to, that's all, I'm in no way incapable of playing games without keyboard/mouse. In fact I prefer a controller for most games, especially flight sims, though the Descent/Freespace games are probably better off with the infinite combinations afforded by a keyboard. And god help us if someone makes a Battlestar Galactica flight sim...at least one based on the new BSG.

The fliptacular Viper II! Performing acrobatics that would tear an atmospheric fighter to shreds in an instant!!

[Fishy]

i'm fairly indifferent. i can aim infinitely better with a mouse than i can with thumbsticks. that's my only logic.

I simply can't stand FPS games on consoles for this reason. They will forever be fail without a mouse and keyboard, and yes I know most consoles can do this now but if my PC is good enough to run the same games (and usually can be bought for less $$) then they are kind of obsolete. This is my breakdown:

PC plays:

FPS

RTS

MMO

Emulaturs

Console plays:

Adventure/RPG

Sports

Driving

[I-n-j-i-n]

I simply can't stand FPS games on consoles for this reason. They will forever be fail without a mouse and keyboard, and yes I know most consoles can do this now but if my PC is good enough to run the same games (and usually can be bought for less $$) then they are kind of obsolete.

I think that's a silly thing to say when many FPS games nowadays are designed to play on a console just the same. Call of Duty games for example, made the conversion more than well. It plays identically the same as it does for the PC to me.

Console plays:

Adventure/RPG

Sports

Driving

Funniest three lines I've ever seen. What?

[BlueMage]

No they don't. Auto updates that does everything for you with perfect function is not even close to the amount of updating we all had to do for PC games since the Doom days. Also, you don't need to log online for almost no console games except for something like Phantasy Star Universe. That isn't much of a point to make. So a few console games are like PC games. But with almost none of the similar hassles otherwise.

Hassle I hear you say. What hassle? You get the patch, you click the button, and off it goes. You just have the choice about whether you install the patch or not (example, I personally prefer the unpatched version of System Shock 2). Beyond that, the only hassle I've encountered was with mods, and then, more a case of weeding the worthwhile from the piss-weak.

I never said anything about modding. And since when was modding consoles ever a necessary experience? Never.

Given that I find the cost of purchasing most game media ridiculous, I'm going to go out on a limb here and call it fairly necessary. Let us not forget the hassle of importing if you wish to go the purely legal path, nevermind ensuring your system is compatible with the game you imported.

Statistically, the console problems are way overblown. Even at the worst times for the 360, the statistics were approximately at the MOST, 2% of all the millions of consoles.

I couldn't care less - 2% of several millions is still on the order of tens of thousands - significant.

And the vast majority of them were eligible for refund or replacement.

Huzzah!

Compare that to the constant problems most PCs face no matter how much you try to avoid them

What problems? No, really, what problems? Maybe it's because I live in the magical wonderland of Australia that I'm not subjected to what PC gamers in other nations clearly are, but I'm not sure I quite understand what problems you refer to.

my CD/DVD player exploding. Literally EXPLODING was pretty spectacular. I never came across anything like that with any consoles, ever

Jesus fucking Christ what did you DO to that poor thing to make it do that?

And that's not mentioning the neverending stream of viral attacks even when I'm running three virus/spam detectors at once.

Never ending? What, you click every single .exe that comes into your inbox? This "never-ending" stream you talk about is hype - browse intelligently, sufficiently obfuscate your email, and you won't be subject to this. Common sense.

I don't see this as any sort of bashing for PC games. It's just reality. I still lean towards console games as THE gaming systems, but I'm in no way bashing PC games. But if you're in it only to play games, it is for a fact more of a hassle than just opening a box and plugging a system in.

Uh, yeah? Where did I ever say it wasn't more of a hassle. Pardon my geekiness, but that's always been half the fun - getting things just right. Must be my perfectionist streak at work again, but knowing I got the game running by my hand alone is significantly more satisfying than just popping it in and watching the pretty colours.

I mean, look at it the other way, and it's for a fact that console games aren't as easy to openly modify or manipulate using a controller compared to the keyboard (not a bash on controllers since I prefer them. It's just not as complex that's all).

Both have their pros and cons that way.

Granted.

And by the numbers, the vast majority of gamers steer towards console gaming for a reason. I doubt they do that because 'games are simpulrrr hurrrr'.

I have a theory on that. You probably won't like it. Anyone who espouses the "wisdom of the masses" definitely won't like it.

[Fishy]

I think that's a silly thing to say when many FPS games nowadays are designed to play on a console just the same. Call of Duty games for example, made the conversion more than well. It plays identically the same as it does for the PC to me.

I didn't say it doesn't play the same, I said I'd much rather play it using a mouse and keyboard, and my laptop has both of these. FPS games are annoying on console controllers to me.

Funniest three lines I've ever seen. What?

I'm saying these are the types of game I usually end up on a console playing. Final fantasies and similar, platformers, EA sports games and racing games. The other list is the type of games I usually end up on a PC playing. Its my personal preferance. How is that funny?

[Kureejii Lea]

I'm saying these are the types of game I usually end up on a console playing. Final fantasies and similar, platformers, EA sports games and racing games. The other list is the type of games I usually end up on a PC playing. Its my personal preferance. How is that funny?

Because this is turning into a bitch-fest and everything is apparently viewed as antagonism?