Daaave Posted March 7, 2005 Posted March 7, 2005 Xbox. Just because you're a bit thinner than your even fatter mum it doesn't mean you're in excellent physical shape, if you could fit through the door and view the normal people you'd notice that cheeseburger boy. Squid suck.
Spooky Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 I got a PS2, (dosen't everybody), but I never play with it. Trouble is the interface. Give me a console with a keyboard and mouse that I can plug in a high rez monitor, and yes I will play it. I do understand why we gotta stick with those damn controlers and I'm through bitchin about that. Also, I too see much more interest in PC titles because they are much more adult. And another thing, I have nothing but respect for the japanese people, but I always consider it a blessing to see to greater part of PC gaming unblemished by the dreadful anime influence which plagues most console gaming (on most consoles anyway).
Gorth Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 I built my first PC, so I could play Fallout when it was released. Before that, I used my trusty old souped up Amiga 4000 for most stuff, including internet. Being an old Amiga fanboy, I'll say, it had all the advantages of a game console, i.e. one hardware manufacturer for the core computer and the operating system, yet all the flexibility of a personal computer. The powers that be knows I hated PC's when they started to dominated the game market. It was awful, looking at all those inferior games and dumbed down new releases, that had to be able to be developed for both the superior Amiga platform and the inferior PC platform... sounds familiar ? Once consoles get to the point of being better than PC hardware and having easier to use interface devices, I might consider leaving the PC behind as a gaming machine... “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
Spooky Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 Gorth, this is off-topic, but your name sounds familiar, did you ever by any chance play Everquest or Everquest 2, if you did, were you in an all-dwarf guild called the heavy foot ?
Gorth Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 Gorth, this is off-topic, but your name sounds familiar, did you ever by any chance play Everquest or Everquest 2, if you did, were you in an all-dwarf guild called the heavy foot ? Sorry, but no My only on-line multiplayer experience is running a text based mud together with some buddies, quite some years ago (10-15). It still exists, and so does my account, but none of those recent mmorpg phenomena. “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
jaguars4ever Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 Gorth, this is off-topic, but your name sounds familiar, did you ever by any chance play Everquest or Everquest 2, if you did, were you in an all-dwarf guild called the heavy foot ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Haha! The Shame!
Yst Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 You have to upgrade your PC every year to play some games. Xbox been out for 4 years. New console have about 5 year gap. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I've got to offer a rebuttal to this assertion. My video card was two and a half years old (Radeon 9700 Pro), and my motherboard and RAM were three years old (Asus K7V-266 w/ 1GB DDR2100), with my CPU being probably about two years old (Athlon XP 2400+) when Doom 3 came out, and the system wasn't even close to falling beneath the game's specs. Even my system from over FOUR YEARS prior to its release (512MB DDR, Athlon XP 1800+, Asus K7M, Geforce 4 4200), which was not a particularly expensive system at the time, is capable of running the game on low settings. And all that hardware is from well before the Xbox's release, I'm fairly sure. And Doom 3 was the most demanding title of the year from a hardware point of view. I don't know where you're getting this 'every year' idea.
Daaave Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 I got a PS2, (dosen't everybody<{POST_SNAPBACK}> nope. Just because you're a bit thinner than your even fatter mum it doesn't mean you're in excellent physical shape, if you could fit through the door and view the normal people you'd notice that cheeseburger boy. Squid suck.
Brunhilde Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 Why does Nintendo get 2 options?? I vote Dreamcast!
SteveThaiBinh Posted March 8, 2005 Posted March 8, 2005 The PC is pretty much it if you enjoy strategy games. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ditto for point-and-click adventures. At least, if they ever made any ... "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov)
Yst Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 The PC is pretty much it if you enjoy strategy games. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ditto for point-and-click adventures. At least, if they ever made any ... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think the problem with the Adventure genre presently isn't so much its loss as the RPG and FPS genres gains. The problem is, the KotOR games do 90% of what history's great adventure games do, and they have an RPG system behind them, to boot. Great stories, rewarding puzzles and clever dialogue are no longer exclusive to adventures. The FPS and RPG genres have increasingly concerned themselves with managing to include good writing and plot in the mix. I don't know if Adventure has a future, and I think it's specifically because the genre has nothing unique to add to what the increasingly immersive games of other genres already do. The great adventures of the past will remain great (Grim Fandango and The Longest Journey are personal favourites), but I don't see that the formula they use can survive without doing something unique from other genres, unless they survive merely as budget titles. There are lots of adventures coming out these days, they just don't get press, and they sell for less, because the market's not there. And I doubt if it will return. I think the adventure will go the way of the FMV game. That is, its defining element will be eaten up by other genres, until it ceases to exist by itself.
Rosbjerg Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 NINTENDO!! the old .. ahh the memories! :D or the Amiga 500 .. Fortune favors the bald.
Carrie Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 The Atari Home Entertainment System (The original name for the 2600, before the 5200 came out) I had one of those, when I was oh... 4 or 5 or so Back when they had fake wood on the one part.
Maedhros Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 Xbox 2 will have only 256 MB RAM so it will suck just as bad as Xbox because by dec. 2006 1 GB RAM will be standard for PC and you'll have loading loading on Xbox 2.PS3 looks too good to be true. Right now PC (with good accessories) is the best gaming experience. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You can't really compare x-box ram to pc-ram, the x-box requires much less ram the the pc.
Azure79 Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 As for my favourite system in my gaming setup from the perspective of its game library quality, that would clearly be my computer. And by "computer," I of course mean my TI 99/4A Home Computer, currently situated at the centre of my gaming setup: No, but seriously, I'm a fan of the oldies. Among consoles, I'm pretty sure each, individually, of my TI99 (esp. Tombstone City and TI Invaders), my Nintendo (esp. Zelda II) and my Super Nintendo (esp. FFVI and Chrono Trigger) has consumed more of my gaming time than all subsequent console systems combined, over the last year. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Damn... Now I'm all jealous. Well not really, but I wish I had something like that set up at my place.
><FISH'> Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 Give this man a medal! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or a girlfriend " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Look closer. He's clearly pointing to her. ^_^ <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL p.s LOL!!! I got a PS2, (dosen't everybody<{POST_SNAPBACK}> nope. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> me neither (they suck) The PC is pretty much it if you enjoy strategy games. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ditto for point-and-click adventures. At least, if they ever made any ... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> star trek: armada 2 is a great strategy game IMO the best gaming EXPERIENCE is the xbox. but PC is definitely superior in many ways
Judge Hades Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 Best overall experience is the PC for unlike the X-Box the PC version of KotOR 2 is getting a patch.
Kaldhore Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 Well it seems pretty clear that those who commented on the pc user being the dying breed obviously doesnt have " the pulse of the population " at their hand. Most "Kids" I know have a PC in their home, THEN one or two consoles. But which console differs alot. I bought a PSONE when it was first released because I couldnt afford a PC (used to own an amiga tho ! and a spectrum in years gone by). As soon as I bought my first PC I have never looked back - tho I did buy a PS2 when certain gaming corporations decided not to continue certain games on the PC and xfered them to the consoles. Meaning you HAD to buy a console - pretty damn lousy trick that I have never forgiven them for (after that game havent played another by them since). So its hands down PC tops the bill by over 70%.
DSLuke Posted March 9, 2005 Posted March 9, 2005 Best overall experience is the PC for unlike the X-Box the PC version of KotOR 2 is getting a patch. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D And by the light of the moon He prays for their beauty not doom
Osiris Posted March 10, 2005 Posted March 10, 2005 now we need a poll for the worst gaming experience. And we would have to include Apple Mac's in that poll.
Lcaus Scuks Posted March 11, 2005 Posted March 11, 2005 You can't really compare x-box ram to pc-ram, the x-box requires much less ram the the pc. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So 256 MB for the Xbox 2 is as good as 1536-2048 MB for the PC ? I'm talking about 2008-2009 games. Will you be able to patch all the future Xbox 2 games or you'll just have to deal with the problems because it's a known limitation. It's a fact that the consoles are designed for regular people who don't want to bother with the advantage the PC offers, they just want to play a little and relax. About PS3 and Cell: http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cells/Cell0.html
wannabealoser125 Posted March 12, 2005 Author Posted March 12, 2005 You can't really compare x-box ram to pc-ram, the x-box requires much less ram the the pc. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So 256 MB for the Xbox 2 is as good as 1536-2048 MB for the PC ? I'm talking about 2008-2009 games. Will you be able to patch all the future Xbox 2 games or you'll just have to deal with the problems because it's a known limitation. It's a fact that the consoles are designed for regular people who don't want to bother with the advantage the PC offers, they just want to play a little and relax. About PS3 and Cell: http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cells/Cell0.html <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You should be able to patch all future Xbox2 games considering Microsoft is making it a requirement that all games have Xbox Live capiblities At least thats what "Electronic Gaming" magizine said....
Yst Posted March 12, 2005 Posted March 12, 2005 Give this man a medal! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or a girlfriend " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Look closer. He's clearly pointing to her. ^_^ <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL p.s LOL!!! Yes, she's a fast girl. What with her 300 baud modem. Aww, yeah.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now