Who has it better? (Or, "My PC ownz00rz joor boxx00rz)
 

Gamers, as a whole, are a competitive bunch. I mean, just think about the rabid behaviour seen in the SNES vs Genesis console war, or presently, Xbox vs Gamecube vs PS2. But my friends, there has always been an underlying dispute, an underground outlet for even more foaming-at-the-mouth argument. That is console gaming vs computer gaming. I'd like to hear what the forumers think who has it better. But I'm going to post pros and cons for both sides. 'Cause, you know, I'm bored.

Computer Pros:
-Almost always, graphics have been better in games
-You don't have to wait for the next game in the series for it to be patched (online downloads)
-PC gamers had online play when console gamers were still doing there multi-player Goldeneye matches (which isn't a bad thing. I'm just saying is all.)
-No need to worry about purchasing "the next big system", as is constantly seen in the console industry
-Invented teh 1337 sp33k

Computer Cons:
-Much more likely to have lag in their games (especially online)
-Constant patching can get annoying
-The classing PC gaming situation: You just went out and bought your shiny new game, when you realize you need a new graphics card/sound card/hard drive/computer just to play the damn game. This just doesn't happen in the console industry.
-Having to pay for online games (that's beginning to happen with the online focus of consoles, but PC'ers have been having to deal with this much longer.)
-Having to deal with idiot brats online
-Invented teh 1337 sp33k

Console Pros:
-In most cases, it's more cost friendly to own a console (no need to go out and buy more hardware to play a game. The most extreme case of this for a console owner is to go out and buy a new memory card to replace the faulty one.) This, however could change with the new online game focus, but as of now, it's cheaper to own a console.
-Slightly more mainstream than PC games (which really isn't saying much)
-Console systems, in general, will have more fighting games than PC games. It's just easier to Hadoken with a controller than a keyboard.
-Consoles are much easier to bring to one of your friends house (especially the Gamecube. Man, I love that handle!)
-No 1337 sp33k to be heard of (that could change with the online focus. *insert ominous music here*)

Console Cons:
-Constant patching, while annoying, DOES (in most cases), improve the gameplay and make things even gameplay wise for computer players. Console game developers can't exactly send out a new and improved version of their game to people who have already purchased the old game. So, generally, if you bought a sucky game, you're stuck with it.
-The age old problem with third party accessories. Remember that time you learned that incredible new spell in Neverwinter Nights, or beat that mind-numbingly hard mission in Warcraft III, only to have your data erased the next day? Of course not! PC gamers don't need to worry about crappy memory cards! Buggy memory cards, as well as other stupid ideas by console game makers (third party controllers, *e-reader, *N-Gage) are the bane to consolers existence.
-The horrible, horrible platforming clones. While PC gamers enjoy unique game ideas and interesting main characters (most of the time), console gamers get their Taz the Crashing Pink Caveman of Xtreme Coolness. Sure, we get Solid Snake and Kirby and such, but those are only very rare islands of refuge in a sea of neon coloured, spaztic carnival rejects.
-If you ask a console gamer about the last time he/she played an RTS, they'll look blankly at you and start mumbling something about fatalities and such. This brings me to my last point: it is nearly IMPOSSIBLE for Real Time Strategy games to be made for console games. There have been good efforts, such as Starcraft for the N64, and the more recent Goblin Command for all three systems (Blizzard, a highly respected, no, legendary RTS developer in the PC world published Starcraft for N64, which was originally for the computer. A couple people who split from Blizzard to see what they could do on there own were the ones responsible for Goblin Command). Even with the know-how, duplicating the feel of using your key-board to assign your orcs to destroy a village is extremely hard to do with a controller.
-Oh, and, 1337 sp33k is on the horizon, since online console gaming is becoming more popular. pwned!!!11

Well, I'm done. What do you all think? Anything to add? General criticism? Pies in the face? I welcome them all!

*The opinions of Ofi on the e-reader are not necesarily shared by Brian Clevinger, his staff, Black Mage, Red Mage, Black Belt, Theif, The Imps, Garland, or White Mage. Possibly Fighter though. Who know with that guy.

*Come on. N-Gage just sucks.

Well, I use my computer the most often simply because I find it more versatile in my pursuits... I can sit here and do absolutely nothing and yet accomplish something that will manage to hold on the internet, or I can write, program, draw, comment, or play the numerous amounts of games for it.
When I get bored I usually go to one of the... 1...2...3...4...5...6...7 consoles I have. That includes XBOX, GCN, PS2, N64, and Dreamcast. Hehe.
The only reason Im so unliked to playing consoles at the moment is because Im a lazy bastard, and because dad set up the XBOX with the home theater system I actually have to wait for the projector to turn on... and I cant leave it on... crap like that. So I dont play it as often. And cuz my guitar and my parents Karaoke machine is set up in the loft (Along with Eye Toy) there is no chair, so Im having to attempt to finish FFX to play FFX2 on my ass... on the carpet. It hurts my back. :(
And Gamecube is with the PS2, so no Zelda for a while. Dreamcast is disconnected.

So at the moment Im more with PC than anything else.
What? I have my reasons.

The "PC gaming is more expensive than console gaming" bit is a myth. PCs require a steeper initial investment than consoles, yes, but in pretty much every other way they're cheaper. I regularily see PC games that are only a few months old on sale for CAN$10-$20, while I pretty much never see a console game for a non-discontinued platform for less than $30.

New generations of consoles generally come out once every five years, cost about CAN$300 on average, and have substantially fewer games than a PC. In order to have a selection of new games equivalent to what's on the PC, you'll need to have at least two different consoles, which means about $600 every five years. A PC gamer, on the other hand, can fairly easily keep their machine at least reasonably up to date while only spending only about $150 a year on upgrades, and you can offset this by selling your old hardware, while still being able to run all your old games on your new equipment. With a few notable exceptions like the PS2 and GBA, you can't sell an old console without also giving up a substantial portion of your game library.

While MMORPGs for the PC typically require a monthly fee, that's also true for console MMORPGs. Unlike consoles, however, on the PC MMORPGs are the only genre of game that requires a monthly fee, while services like X-Box Live require a fee no matter what kind of game you're playing, and certain games charge an additional fee on top of what you pay for the basic service.

And then there's the fact that PCs can be used for a lot more than just games, while consoles are single-purpose machines.

Isn't it a little unfair to one the one hand assume the console gamer will purchases at least 2 consoles the instant they come out while the PC gamer will wisely wait for the hardware to come down in price? Apples to apples here. If the console gamer is buying at launch then the PC gamer would probably by buying 9800XTs or other such $400-$500 video cards.

And don't forget that the smooth upgrading process often isn't so smooth. There can always be those times when you want to upgrade the CPU, but that means replacing all your RAM and the motherboard, because the new motherboard doesn't take SDRSDRAM.

Oh, and let's not forget the fun of finding out x slightly older game doesn't play nice in XP, or that driver revision x.xxx causes game y to look like it was passed through a shredder. (Ever see the exploded boat in EQ? SOL buggered the boats up for us ATI users in a really interesting fasion)

That said you'd have to pry my PC out of my cold dead hands. Of course, the nice thing about consoles is that as long as one is willing to wait a bit it's easy to simply have both consoles and a PC. And the PC makes it easier to wait for the console.

PS. While PC games can be a bargain hunter's dream, it's really hard to rent them. On the other hand there's a rental place around here that rents older PS2 games. The cost is $5 Canadian for 2 games for a week. Considereing that's enough time to finish most games...

About the computers having better graphics, that's not always true. It's only true if you have a top of the line PC. Usually, for better games, people have to turn down things like graphics and sound so the game runs smoother, and more so if it's an online game.

Consoles are cheaper than PCs, butt hey mroe than make up for it by the horrifically high cost of their games. And as for the patching part Ofi was mentioning, it also means console programmers are bound to produce a fully functionally game playable out-of-the-box lest they want to be sued and lambasted by angry consumers.

Ironcially enough, the first console to have buggy games was the Xbox.

Atronflame: I am utterly jealous of you.

Actually, that's not true. Or I guess you never beheld the great FF2 bug. I had a couple buddies that couldn't finish the game because of it. Sword of Vermillion on the Genesis had this interesting bug with a certain piece of armor that could be exploited to yeild the character a really awesome AC value. And there were others to be sure.

Yeah, but the bgus couldn't have been as bad as most PC games. Witht he crutch of the patch to lean on, designers usually rush their stuff out, e.g. Giants: Citizen Kabuto...

Heh, I don't think any console game has ever even come close to some of the PC bug-ridden legends. PC games that were so bugged it wasn't even possible to finish the game. Bugs so bad that even patches caused bugs. Not to mention games shipped without actually being finished. I don't mean unfinished as in buggy, but unfinished as in actually missing stuff. Shadows of Luclin is a great example of that.

But hell, PC bugs are so famous that Underdogs even has a catagory for games that were good after all the patches.

No surprise, considering who made it...

I'm not in a great position to debate here, as pretty much my only experience of console gaming is of my second hand black and white Gameboy which I haven't played in ages and only has Pokemon and Tetris games. I've played consoles once or twice at friend's houses, and TBH I wasn't very good at them, probably because I've hardly played them.

However, what I do know is that...
a.) My parents are perfectly willing to pay for a computer.
b.) I would have to at least pay a deposit towards a console.
c.) I have to buy my games (thus, I dislike expensive console games).
d.) I can use computer for loads of other stuff (you try doing your homework on a Game Cube).
e.) I like RTS games.
f.) Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2 exist (on PC).
g.) Baldur's Gate:Dark Alliance exists (on non-PC).

All these point towards PC. For me anyway.

Mikorlias Zard