NationStates Jolt Archive

So what'll it be? Xbox 360? Computer? Perhaps a DS?

For me it has to be the Playstation 3. Graphics are almost identical to the Xbox 360, but the games are far better, and the system has more potential. Besides, Blu-Ray dominated HD-DVD.

What about you?

N64.

Oh wait, current? Yeah, I don't do current gaming. N64 and PS2 are my platforms of choice.

Edit: Granted, I do enjoy Halo 3. What's that Xbox 360?

PS3 is the best platform technologically.

360 has the best game library, but PS3 has Ratchet & Clank, Resistance: Fall Of Man, and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. A large number of good games are expected this year to add to that.

*edit*
N64.

Oh wait, current? Yeah, I don't do current gaming. N64 and PS2 are my platforms of choice.

Agreed.

Well, as far as I know Linux will only run on the first two in the poll, and the PS3 probably has more teraflops than I'd be able to afford in a computer…

I'd say PS3 in terms of quality of the system and its general utility over the 360. Unfortunately, it costs lots of money and my wallet has little money and the little it does have is saving for some investments I'd like to make. =\

A large number of good games are expected this year to add to that.

Yes, such as GTA IV, Metal Gear Solid 4, Resident Evil 5 (tentitively), and Final Fantasy XIII and Versus-XIII late this year or early next.

Yes, such as GTA IV, Metal Gear Solid 4, Resident Evil 5 (tentitively), and Final Fantasy XIII and Versus-XIII late this year or early next.

Resistance 2 *drools*

Well, as far as I know Linux will only run on the first two in the poll, and the PS3 probably has more teraflops than I'd be able to afford in a computer…
The PS3 actually has more TPLOPage than a computer? What kinda processor? I'm impressed it this is the case. :eek:

PS3. First, because it has the most potential, second because it has a Blu-Ray player built in, and third because it has a lot of my favorite games available as well as a lot in the pipeline. Not to mention online play is free and the price differential between it and the 360 has narrowed a lot since release.

The PS3 actually has more TPLOPage than a computer? What kinda processor? I'm impressed it this is the case. :eek:

multiple interlinked cell processors. It's a home supercomputer, a mini-Cray.

multiple interlinked cell processors. It's a home supercomputer, a mini-Cray.

All I've got to say is that PS3s busted the petaflop barrier on Folding@Home; that's rather impressive when you consider that range is only just being breached by the world's most powerful supercomputers. I can only imagine what new heights might be possible if the current user base were to put their power towards distributed computing.

Come to think of it, that might lead to blackouts...as much as I like the PS3, that thing sucks down power and produces a lot of heat.

All I've got to say is that PS3s busted the petaflop barrier on Folding@Home; that's rather impressive when you consider that range is only just being breached by the world's most powerful supercomputers. I can only imagine what new heights might be possible if the current user base were to put their power towards distributed computing.

Come to think of it, that might lead to blackouts...as much as I like the PS3, that thing sucks down power and produces a lot of heat.

Store vertical with no obstructions above. The 360 is quite the little heater, too.

Scientists are using PS3's for their experiments because they offer the best processing/$ ratio available and can run Linux.

I like the PC. I would have the hardware anyways, so for me it wins on price. Also, I tend to like the games better.

After that, I would say the Wii.

\The 360 is quite the little heater, too.

But unlike the PS3, the 360 is LOUD. That fan is ridiculous.

I like the PC. I would have the hardware anyways, so for me it wins on price.

You would be the only one. I for one can't afford to play PC games. People whine about a $500 price tag on a PS3, but between getting enough RAM, getting a top-of-the-line video card, and getting a badass monitor, and then having to update every two years or so at the least, you'd spend WAAAAAY more than that.

Come to think of it, that might lead to blackouts...as much as I like the PS3, that thing sucks down power and produces a lot of heat.

How much power does it consume? My 360 uses 5A at 120V.

You would be the only one. I for one can't afford to play PC games. People whine about a $500 price tag on a PS3, but between getting enough RAM, getting a top-of-the-line video card, and getting a badass monitor, and then having to update every two years or so at the least, you'd spend WAAAAAY more than that.With the exception of the graphics card, I need what I have for non-gaming stuff (a concept gamers do sometimes have a hard time grasping).

Wii. Unlike the other 2 (not counting PC), Nintendo tries something different. Plus, until I can legally play Mario, Zelda, Metroid, F-Zero, or Star Fox on the others, I'm sticking with Wii.

Wii. Unlike the other 2 (not counting PC), Nintendo tries something different. Plus, until I can legally play Mario, Zelda, Metroid, F-Zero, or Star Fox on the others, I'm sticking with Wii.
Your first reason is the reason why I gave Wii second pick.

Nintendo tries something different.
Mario, Zelda, Metroid, F-Zero, or Star Fox

Hahaha, oh wow.

Anyway, as I say every time this identical thread is made, a game console/platform is only as good as the games you can play on it. PC has the most and the best games by far, but if you need a console it's still the 360, though the PS3 is looking better and better all the time.

PC

First things first. Aesthetics. IMO the XBox360 and PS3 just look butt ugly. I would be ashamed to have either of them on show (I could put them in a drawer, but as people have pointed out. The are quite hot. The Wii is better though.

I just prefer a mouse and keyboard, especially for games in first person perspective, RTS, most RPGs. I think the only time that gamepads actually come into their own is for things like platformers. And I have a logitech pad for that purpose. The idea of being to use one and one form of control doesn't set a fire in my heart.

I like old games. I'm currently replaying Fallout (in anticipation), and I recently went back to the original Monkey Island games.

I like free stuff. Whether mods or free indy games...

I like indy games (anyone played Audiosurf?)

I like tinkering with my computer.

It is a good media computer (I don't care what Sony says, I'm not convinced the PS3 is particuarly good at this)

It is also good for those rare occasions I need to do some work or something else serious.

Anyway, that is why the PC is best (*for me*).

...Poor console-tards.

I have yet to find a console that can beat mouse/keyboard combo for fps'. The wii comes closest, but still misses out. So pc it is!

Well, as far as I know Linux will only run on the first two in the poll, and the PS3 probably has more teraflops than I'd be able to afford in a computer…
Interesting issue, I googled and found it's possible to run Linux on all except Wii.

Some guy (http://www.hacker.co.il/psp/bochs/) managed to start Linux and Windows 95 on a PSP but couldn't do anything due to lack of keyboard. There is a wiki (http://www.free60.org/wiki/Main_Page) for running Linux, BSD and Darwin on Xbox 360. Linux has been ported (http://www.dslinux.org/) to DS. There is a wiki (http://www.wiili.org/index.php?title=Main_Page) for trying to figure out how to port Linux to Wii but no working port yet.
You would be the only one. I for one can't afford to play PC games. People whine about a $500 price tag on a PS3, but between getting enough RAM, getting a top-of-the-line video card, and getting a badass monitor, and then having to update every two years or so at the least, you'd spend WAAAAAY more than that.
Having a good monitor, decent CPU and enough RAM is great if you spend a lot of time in front of the computer even if you don't play games on it. The only extra expense to turn an average PC into a gaming PC is switching from integrated graphics to a graphics card from the second newest family (not the top of the line card since that is overpriced for marginal improvements in gaming experience over it's predecessor).

I perfer keyboard, trackball and monitor so PC for me. If I spent enough time gaming to need 2 platforms then Wii is the only other alternative that looks interesting.

They all have a lot to offer to someone looking to be entertained.

I give the PC top marks for adaptability, while I think the Wii has great potential

I'd say the PC for two reasons. First of all, playing an FPS on any other system is plain retarded. It's so much more intuitive to use a mouse than your silly gamepads...

Secondly, free games on the PC. Daemon tools and Alcohol 120% anyone? :p

So what'll it be? Xbox 360? Computer? Perhaps a DS?

For me it has to be the Playstation 3. Graphics are almost identical to the Xbox 360, but the games are far better, and the system has more potential. Besides, Blu-Ray dominated HD-DVD.

What about you?

Hahahahaha Newbie. [/joking tone]

Seriously though, m vote goes for the ony "next"-gen console currently on the market, that is to say, the Wii.

The Xbox 360, PS3, and PSP are all exactly what we've done in the past, except that it accounts for slight technological upgrades. The Wii is completely different from most anything we have done in the past, and has he admirable goal of trying to reach more than just teenagers. I like how Nintendo has decided that someone who is not going through puberty has the right to enjoy a video game as mush as someone who is.

Plus Brawl and MarioKart. MArioKart may well be my favourite game, it is completely awesome.

Hahahahaha Newbie. [/joking tone]

I can't even comprehend how I might be considered one...

I give the PC top marks for adaptability, while I think the Wii has great potential

I do like the PC platform as well, though with spec. errors, it tends to lose some ground, but that is perhaps just me.

Love the platform as a whole though.

I wish more developers took the Wii seriously, and developed games to it's graphical level (or even close), rather than giving us games that look worse than Halo (1). The Wii has better graphics than most people realize it could, but hopefully Force Unleashed, or something equally cool (sounding) will utilise best the Wii's graphics.

PC. Nothing beats the sheer variety and complexity of PC gaming.

Frankly I'm surprised the Wii has fared so low here. Perhaps its target audience and NationStates' is far different.

How much power does it consume? My 360 uses 5A at 120V.

Wow I have a a dual opteron 7 hard drive server that uses less wattage then that I did not know it was so high

I'd say a PC, it's far more modular than any console system ever will be in the near future. Although I've seen the graphics on PS3 and they are impressive.

Because I'm an ass I voted for the DS, never mind that I have only one game for it, and mine hasn't had power for three months.

Frankly I'm surprised the Wii has fared so low here. Perhaps its target audience and NationStates' is far different.

It could be that it's a one trick pony with an extremely limited games library outside of mini-games, which are basically all the same. Just maybe.

Actually, it's pretty fun if you play it drunk with a couple of mates, but as a console, it just doesn't cut the mustard.

I just mean that it's tremendous popularity in the "real world" is far different than it's popularity here.

I bet if you asked a group of non-hardcore gamers or just non-gamers what their favorite was that they've played before they would say the Wii. Especially if you asked adults.

I just mean that it's tremendous popularity in the "real world" is far different than it's popularity here.

I bet if you asked a group of non-hardcore gamers or just non-gamers what their favorite was that they've played before they would say the Wii. Especially if you asked adults.

Aye, it all depends on what you're looking for though, doesn't it? If you want shooters, you're not going to go and get a Wii. If you want something you can pull out and show to people and not play a lot otherwise, especially non-gamers, the Wii's your man. Still doesn't change the fact that it's not a great console.

As and aside for all you PC enthusiasts: the PC adaptability is also one of it's weak points. I know I can buy a PS3 now for €400 and I'll be able to play all the latest games for five year, while if I did the same with a PC I wouldn't be able to do that for more than six months, because PC developers are lazy and just keep on upping their minimum specs instead of making more with what they've got, as console games have to.

Also, for me controllers are much easier than a mouse and keyboard.

I'd say the PC for two reasons. First of all, playing an FPS on any other system is plain retarded. It's so much more intuitive to use a mouse than your silly gamepads...

Secondly, free games on the PC. Daemon tools and Alcohol 120% anyone? :p

Alcohol 120%? What's that? *whistles innocently*

I use Alcohol to copy DVDs that have been released for free distribution like Aaron Russo's America: Freedom to Fascism and political DVDs.

PC>Everything else...

Though Wii comes close, at least its doing something worthwhile, someone should let Sony and Microsoft know that Shiny /= Better Graphics...

Also, Graphics /= Great Game...

As and aside for all you PC enthusiasts: the PC adaptability is also one of it's weak points. I know I can buy a PS3 now for €400 and I'll be able to play all the latest games for five year, while if I did the same with a PC I wouldn't be able to do that for more than six months, because PC developers are lazy and just keep on upping their minimum specs instead of making more with what they've got, as console games have to.

You can. I've had my computer for more then that, and I used older components. Amazingly I can still play current games (Assasin's Creed being the most recent). The idea that a PC has to be upgraded every 6 months is just crazy talk spread by the ignorant and has no basis in reality

Also, for me controllers are much easier than a mouse and keyboard.

You can use controllers on a PC.

Aye, it all depends on what you're looking for though, doesn't it? If you want shooters, you're not going to go and get a Wii. If you want something you can pull out and show to people and not play a lot otherwise, especially non-gamers, the Wii's your man. Still doesn't change the fact that it's not a great console.

As and aside for all you PC enthusiasts: the PC adaptability is also one of it's weak points. I know I can buy a PS3 now for €400 and I'll be able to play all the latest games for five year, while if I did the same with a PC I wouldn't be able to do that for more than six months, because PC developers are lazy and just keep on upping their minimum specs instead of making more with what they've got, as console games have to.

Also, for me controllers are much easier than a mouse and keyboard.
And with a PC I can spend about 1400 USD ... play the latest games for the next 3-4 years if done right as well as have a pretty solid system for work and other activities during that time and will continue to be of use untill something non replaceable fries

And have a controller as well

Hooray for the PC Master Race! Go away, you unwashed console 'tards!

Indeed. I just upgarded my computer to a schweet quad core 4.summit gig processor, a nice new power unit, 4 gb of ram and kept the existing ATI video card and the soundcard...

Cost me about £220 (managed to get the quad core wholesale from my mate in the busines)

If you are going to play an FPS I have 4 letters for you that win out over any console: W,A,S,D

The Elder Scrolls games are far better on PC than console, especially with the mods that can be downloaded or made on your own.

Mouse precision does help with FPS games, but I like the console controller thumbsticks for flying and racing. I've yet to see a good analog thumbstick gamepad controller for PC.

I got my 360 for the same price as a Wii, and I got it brand new. Because I am magic.

Like a Wizard.

OG.

Well, as I am currently obsessed with GTA IV I will go with 360 of course I love the PC and the Wii can be great depending on the current games out at the time.

PS3 = Overpriced overpowered piece of crap.

Xbox 360 = Good all around game console that needs more games then Halo 3 and Gears of war.

Wii = Awesome system with trademark Nintendo innovation. Needs more adult games and more use of the Wii remote on the few it has.

DS = Not powerful enough, and TOO quirky for my taste.

PSP = Not unique enough. Focuses too much on graphics and THE LACK OF A SECOND ANALOG STICK!

PC = Dosen't count because it changes depending on the person and how much money they have.


Winner- Wii
(Very close) Runner up- Xbox 360

Does not count- PC because it can be almost anything except the Wii, and varys from person to person.

Best Handheld- DS.
Most Annoying Handheld- PSP


Last place Loser- PS3

So for some games, like Freespace, SWG:Space, Falcon 4.0 and MechWarrior 4, it is essential to have a Joystick with a rudder and throttle. Can anybody recommend a good one that's still in production, preferably not manufactured by Logitech?

So for some games, like Freespace, SWG:Space, Falcon 4.0 and MechWarrior 4, it is essential to have a Joystick with a rudder and throttle. Can anybody recommend a good one that's still in production, preferably not manufactured by Logitech?

I always had good luck with Saitek's like this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826102506

I always had good luck with Saitek's like this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826102506

Hmm and the price is right too

I've yet to see a good analog thumbstick gamepad controller for PC.

Not a fan of the XBox360 or PS3?

Not a fan of the XBox360 or PS3?

Own PS2, know people with PS3 and 360. I like both. I voted PS3 because it has the best hardware.

You would be the only one. I for one can't afford to play PC games. People whine about a $500 price tag on a PS3, but between getting enough RAM, getting a top-of-the-line video card, and getting a badass monitor, and then having to update every two years or so at the least, you'd spend WAAAAAY more than that.

I can build a wicked-fast rig for under $1,000, thanks to the exceptional GeForce 9 series cards.

Mouse precision does help with FPS games, but I like the console controller thumbsticks for flying and racing. I've yet to see a good analog thumbstick gamepad controller for PC.

Corded Xbox 360 gamepads can be used on PCs. It's probably the best pad you can get, though the D-pad is rather shitty, which can be a problem in some games.

I'm not sure I can recommend a purchase of a gamepad that expensive though, not when gamepad support in PC games is generally as poor as it is. Most of the times you can't get all buttons, sticks triggers to work properly, the interfaces are rarely designed to be usable with a gamepad and the games will force you to drop the pad and reach for the mouse and keyboard to do various things.

I can build a wicked-fast rig for under $1,000, thanks to the exceptional GeForce 9 series cards.
Wow, that's only 100% more expensive. Way to disprove his point.

PS3 = Overpriced overpowered piece of crap.

Xbox 360 = Good all around game console that needs more games then Halo 3 and Gears of war.

Wii = Awesome system with trademark Nintendo innovation. Needs more adult games and more use of the Wii remote on the few it has.

DS = Not powerful enough, and TOO quirky for my taste.

PSP = Not unique enough. Focuses too much on graphics and THE LACK OF A SECOND ANALOG STICK!

PC = Dosen't count because it changes depending on the person and how much money they have.


Winner- Wii
(Very close) Runner up- Xbox 360

Does not count- PC because it can be almost anything except the Wii, and varys from person to person.

Best Handheld- DS.
Most Annoying Handheld- PSP


Last place Loser- PS3


http://forum.crystalxp.net/uploads/post-386-1127687954.gif

http://www.meristation.com/EPORTAL_IMGS/GENERAL/juegos/PlayStation2-Accion/8c/IMG-cw45be1c85b5e2e/gow2artworkatlaspe.jpg

http://img.engadget.com/common/images/6954164538551596.GIF?0.6970116724853285

PS3 wasn't worth anything till R&C:ToD, so it gets points off for a late start.

The PC is a given, but I didn't vote for it because it's hardly recent. Since the nineties we've had this thing to play with.

The Wii is great but it gets points off for offing its ancestor, the GameCube, by choosing their launch title to be the aforementioned Cube's last game.

PSP and DS aren't exactly next-gen. The graphics are about equal to N64, but the 64 has the advantage of being bigger, and thus easier to notice things on. The best games I find are ports, or remakes, so, didn't get it.

So, even though I don't own one, the 360 wins. It has Halo 3 as its claim to fame, Oblivion is frickin' awesome, and it'll be getting Fable 2 soon enough. Its only real drawback is the thirteen-year-olds that spam XBox Live.

http://forum.crystalxp.net/uploads/post-386-1127687954.gif

http://www.meristation.com/EPORTAL_IMGS/GENERAL/juegos/PlayStation2-Accion/8c/IMG-cw45be1c85b5e2e/gow2artworkatlaspe.jpg

http://img.engadget.com/common/images/6954164538551596.GIF?0.6970116724853285

I don't like God of War, and at the rate MGS4 is coming out, it might as well be on the PS4.

Wii = Awesome system with trademark Nintendo innovation. Needs more adult games and more use of the Wii remote on the few it has.

Honestly, the first thing I thought of when I saw the announcements for the Nintendo Revolution was, "Oh, adult games are going to fly to that thing like no other. Shame."

The Wiimote is capable of being a perfectly disturbing, somewhat realistic tool for groping, and other things I'd rather not think about.

I'll go with the PC more for its versatility than anything, but if I was a more serious gamer, I'd probably pick a PS3 or XBox.

I have a PSP. It has good games, good graphics and decent controls, Only drawbacks are the loading times of it's disk game format and its less than ergonomic shape. Daxter is cool, Battlefront II compares favorably to the PS2 version, and I plan to buy R&C: Size Matters as soon as it's under $30.

Corded Xbox 360 gamepads can be used on PCs. It's probably the best pad you can get, though the D-pad is rather shitty, which can be a problem in some games.

I'm not sure I can recommend a purchase of a gamepad that expensive though, not when gamepad support in PC games is generally as poor as it is. Most of the times you can't get all buttons, sticks triggers to work properly, the interfaces are rarely designed to be usable with a gamepad and the games will force you to drop the pad and reach for the mouse and keyboard to do various things.

Never drop the pad, man. Get a third-party (GameStop, perhaps) corded 360 controller, and spend the most well-invested (in gaming terms) $20 of your life on this piece of shareware (http://www.pinnaclegameprofiler.com/). Try out the trial, you'll be hooked, guaranteed.

What it does is pretty simple. It maps every control on the controller to buttons on the keyboard. If a game has joystick support, the joysticks can be used as normal, or else you can map them to buttons as well. Even if the game has no joystick support though, it's easy: go in game and write down the buttons you use and what they do, then map the joypad separately with Pinnacle.

I have to say i have a favourite gaming console that far out does any mentioned here.

The graphics are true to life, battery life is ever lasting, and can play an infinite number of games.

Its called the Beagle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beagle

Never drop the pad, man. Get a third-party (GameStop, perhaps) corded 360 controller, and spend the most well-invested (in gaming terms) $20 of your life on this piece of shareware (http://www.pinnaclegameprofiler.com/). Try out the trial, you'll be hooked, guaranteed.

What it does is pretty simple. It maps every control on the controller to buttons on the keyboard. If a game has joystick support, the joysticks can be used as normal, or else you can map them to buttons as well. Even if the game has no joystick support though, it's easy: go in game and write down the buttons you use and what they do, then map the joypad separately with Pinnacle.

The biggest problem is getting the d-pad and analog sticks working properly. Especially older games will often be hard-coded to use specific axis (0 and 1), which might be any of the three axis-controls a modern gamepad has. On mine (not a 360 pad) it's the left thumbstick, and that's not what I want to use when I play a 2D platformer. And what use would your analog shoulder triggers be in a driving game if they have to be remapped to a digital (either on or off) keyboard key? Yeah, I whine. It was prompted just as much by the one or two people who said a gamepad for your PC was equal to a console as the post I replied to.

I have a slight hope that this mess can be solved for future games, as Microsoft has slowly begun to enforce a gamepad standard and will hopefully "encourage" more PC developers to design their games with gamepad support in mind, and not just as some tacked on and barely working afterthought. Hopefully the potential improvements will spread to Linux land, where developers are even worse with gamepad support. The only program that I've made every single button on my pad work was a SNES emulator. Good thing I have a console...

I like the Wii only because it's the only thing I know and the way it revolutionized gaming for the average person. Plus, it's dirt cheap compared to GOOD versions of the PS3 and Xbox 360.

I'm just not a shooter person-SSBB is the worst I'll go violence-wise.

...Poor console-tards.

...Poor PC Elitists

If you are going to play an FPS I have 4 letters for you that win out over any console: W,A,S,D

How do four digital keys beat an analogue stick for movement? Considering that you can call out the other stick for being nowhere near as good as a mouse that makes no sense.

I like the Wii only because it's the only thing I know and the way it revolutionized gaming for the average person.

Umm... what?

PSP and DS aren't exactly next-gen. The graphics are about equal to N64, but the 64 has the advantage of being bigger, and thus easier to notice things on. The best games I find are ports, or remakes, so, didn't get it.

I think you may be missing the point of hand-held gaming. Also unless you're counting sequels as remakes/ports, that last part is very wrong.

The biggest problem is getting the d-pad and analog sticks working properly. Especially older games will often be hard-coded to use specific axis (0 and 1), which might be any of the three axis-controls a modern gamepad has. On mine (not a 360 pad) it's the left thumbstick, and that's not what I want to use when I play a 2D platformer. And what use would your analog shoulder triggers be in a driving game if they have to be remapped to a digital (either on or off) keyboard key? Yeah, I whine. It was prompted just as much by the one or two people who said a gamepad for your PC was equal to a console as the post I replied to.

I have a slight hope that this mess can be solved for future games, as Microsoft has slowly begun to enforce a gamepad standard and will hopefully "encourage" more PC developers to design their games with gamepad support in mind, and not just as some tacked on and barely working afterthought. Hopefully the potential improvements will spread to Linux land, where developers are even worse with gamepad support. The only program that I've made every single button on my pad work was a SNES emulator. Good thing I have a console...

I don't know if you've used Pinnacle before, but it tends to have better support than you give it credit for. I used it for NFS: Carbon without any issues at all (driving game). Considering PC games are made with keyboard buttons in mind to begin with, they can survive the toggle-switch method.

Older games could have a few problems, but, once again, every function on the gamepad can be mapped to a mouse or keyboard action. If the original game functions with a keyboard, you can get it to function with your gamepad too.

I don't know if you've used Pinnacle before, but it tends to have better support than you give it credit for. I used it for NFS: Carbon without any issues at all (driving game). Considering PC games are made with keyboard buttons in mind to begin with, they can survive the toggle-switch method.

Older games could have a few problems, but, once again, every function on the gamepad can be mapped to a mouse or keyboard action. If the original game functions with a keyboard, you can get it to function with your gamepad too.

So you do see my point, but declare it irrelevant. This just makes me believe that you've never seriously played any console games. I mean how could you, if you think either on or off, nothing or pedal to the metal, is acceptable in a driving game? That instead of gently pushing a stick to turn slightly it's an OK solution to wildly tap a direction button to get around a corner? Or that either running full speed ahead or standing still is acceptable in just about any game where you have a character that walks?

Getting it to function in some manner isn't the problem. But it rarely works without tweaking, and even with that it almost never works perfectly. I'm not saying you can't have some fun with a gamepad on a PC, but if you want good gamepad support and games that are actually designed around a gamepad, PC is not it.

I think you may be missing the point of hand-held gaming. Also unless you're counting sequels as remakes/ports, that last part is very wrong.

Handheld gaming. Cheap, affordable, transportable, fun, creative. What is there really to get? The games are good, but they will never beat console gaming. They can do things within reason that consoles cannot even without, but there's always this extra bit of satisfaction when you finish a console game compared to a handheld.

Sequels are sequels. They get tiresome. And, in my opinion, a lot of the best handheld games were released back in the days of the GBA, and the GBC. Pokemon was new, not downright pathetic, Megaman still had good ideas, ports and remakes somehow managed to be more nostalgic than they are now, Wario inflicted self harm to aid himself in treasure hunting, not self embarrassment in the form of wearing a pink burlap sack, etc., etc..

The DS is great, and the PSP is good, but I'll always prefer the one screen, and having to play half the games with a controller, not simply the screen.

The best thing I can say about the DS; Elite Beat Agents owns.

How do four digital keys beat an analogue stick for movement? Considering that you can call out the other stick for being nowhere near as good as a mouse that makes no sense.
The reason keys are better in many tasks is one of degrees of freedom. Because each key is in a purely digital state, you have to do a lot less thinking to use them and it takes a very short time for your thoughts to translate into physical action. If your operations are fundamentally binary (direction and speed of movement) then human reflexes will favour the use of simple switches. By introducing unnecessary degrees of freedom in control, analogue sticks can add to both the human processing effort and manual effort in such tasks, though probably less so than using a mouse (depending on how much sensitivity the stick user is used to).

The reason keys are better in many tasks is one of degrees of freedom. Because each key is in a purely digital state, you have to do a lot less thinking to use them and it takes a very short time for your thoughts to translate into physical action. If your operations are fundamentally binary (direction and speed of movement) then human reflexes will favour the use of simple switches. By introducing unnecessary degrees of freedom in control, analogue sticks can add to both the human processing effort and manual effort in such tasks, though probably less so than using a mouse (depending on how much sensitivity the stick user is used to).

You can simply push a stick all up, down, left or right and forget it's analog, but it's very nice to have the ability to walk slower should you want to. PC games usually try to solve this problem by introducing a much worse complexity, which is a key that toggles between walking and running. And hell, in some games that isn't enough, like in stealth games such as Thief. How many walk/run speeds did that game have? Imagine how much better it would have been with an analog stick for movement.

Own PS2, know people with PS3 and 360. I like both. I voted PS3 because it has the best hardware.

You can use PS3 and XBox360 controllers in PCs was what I was trying to say.

You can simply push a stick all up, down, left or right and forget it's analog, but it's very nice to have the ability to walk slower should you want to. PC games usually try to solve this problem by introducing a much worse complexity, which is a key that toggles between walking and running. And hell, in some games that isn't enough, like in stealth games such as Thief. How many walk/run speeds did that game have? Imagine how much better it would have been with an analog stick for movement.

Now, I'll readily admit that I don't frequently use my controller. I tend to use it only for games like Prince of Persia and Psychonauts.

However, I have never experienced what you claim on my budget logitech pad. Indeed, on games like those I can move the analogue as you say to get movements (run, tip-toe, walk etc). I don't recall playing a game where that didn't happen.

Driving games I cannot comment on. I don't play them. But I'd assume the way to get the best from them is with a wheel.

The best thing I can say about the DS; Elite Beat Agents owns.

It sure does :D

So you do see my point, but declare it irrelevant. This just makes me believe that you've never seriously played any console games. I mean how could you, if you think either on or off, nothing or pedal to the metal, is acceptable in a driving game? That instead of gently pushing a stick to turn slightly it's an OK solution to wildly tap a direction button to get around a corner?
Yeah analog control is a must in driving and flying games. Perferably a wheel for driving and joystick for flying.

Or that either running full speed ahead or standing still is acceptable in just about any game where you have a character that walks?
I hate it when there is variable walking speed. I don't want to have to go slower to avoid depleting stamina, making noise, offending NPCs or falling off ledges so narrow they require careful pixel precision movement. The only situation where going slower a worthwhile tradeoff is if you lower your stance and the stance determines your speed.

The PC wins in my opinion, no real contest.

I own consoles - an Atari VCS, a NES, a SNES, an N64, Playstations 1 & 2 and an Xbox - and they all still get occasional use, but they're very much the poor relation to my PCs. That's not to say that I look down on console gaming - I don't, at all (it's fun), but there's no comparison.

Gaming on a PC offers me a far greater range of titles than any console will ever be able to, even ignoring the backwards compatibility that allows me to play any of the games I've owned over the years on my current system (including, via emulators, all the games for old, old systems like the C64, the BBC, the Sinclair family, etc). Consoles simply can't compete with that.

Consoles can't compete technically, either. More recent consoles go some way towards addressing this with their use of hard drives to provide additional storage and extra virtual memory capacity, but they will never offer the sort of flexibility that a general computing platform has. Consequently, games developed for PCs (as opposed to games written for consoles and ported to PC versions) are able to have far more depth.

PC-games are extensible. You can patch them to fix the code glitches that inevitably bubble to the surface once you have a few hundred thousand people running your software (as opposed to a couple of dozen testers saying all is well), which helps. You can provide add-ons to the game content without forcing people to buy a new disc, greatly prolonging the 'life' of an individual title.

I can see where the console advocates are coming from with their love of analogue controllers but the argument kind of falls flat since there's nothing to stop PC users from using gaming controllers if they choose to (I occasionally use a PS2 controller on my PC). One of the other 'points' that console lovers like to throw at me is that they like being able to play on their TV instead of a monitor. Fair enough but, again, there's nothing to stop a PC user from using the TV as a monitor (assuming they have a good enough TV and gfx card).

The only stand-out advantage of consoles, as far as I can see, is that they are cheaper than the sort of high-end, off-the-shelf, PC rig that is required to get the best from a modern PC game. This can be addressed to a degree by putting together your own PC (which isn't all that hard, and which can save a lot of money), but I accept that it isn't a solution that appeals to everyone.

As I said earlier, I don't hate consoles, but it seems pretty clear from where I stand that the PC beats them all as a gaming platform, hands-down, on every single measure.

I'll probably still get a PS3 and a Wii though, just for the hell of it.:p

The only stand-out advantage of consoles, as far as I can see, is that they are cheaper than the sort of high-end, off-the-shelf, PC rig that is required to get the best from a modern PC game. This can be addressed to a degree by putting together your own PC (which isn't all that hard, and which can save a lot of money), but I accept that it isn't a solution that appeals to everyone.


You missed one. Multiplayer. And I can understand why you may think PCs are better because PCs are pretty much always connected to the internet, giving a wider player base. But the key is, multiplayer with a console guarantees that everyone's got the same hardware. You're not going to get people who get the jump on you because their RAM is clocked higher than yours, or their hard drive spins faster, or any of a huge number of other possible factors (including the increased difficulty in hacking on a console).

I don't know that that's a reason to choose consoles over PCs (never affected me), but it is one aspect where consoles tend to have PCs beat.

...snip...
The only stand-out advantage of consoles, as far as I can see, is that they are cheaper than the sort of high-end, off-the-shelf, PC rig that is required to get the best from a modern PC game. This can be addressed to a degree by putting together your own PC (which isn't all that hard, and which can save a lot of money), but I accept that it isn't a solution that appeals to everyone.

I agree, and I would like to add that once a system is built it can be maintained at a higher level than consoles can. Such as, an outdated system can have a new motherboard and CPU put in it, new memory and new video card etc., periodically upgraded as needed or when money allows, an old system could be turned into a 'gaming system' for the same price of a new console system even if you have to replace many things at the same time...

The Elder Scrolls games are far better on PC than console, especially with the mods that can be downloaded or made on your own.

Mouse precision does help with FPS games, but I like the console controller thumbsticks for flying and racing. I've yet to see a good analog thumbstick gamepad controller for PC.

Joysticks pwn for flying sims.

I have a PSP. It has good games, good graphics and decent controls, Only drawbacks are the loading times of it's disk game format and its less than ergonomic shape. Daxter is cool, Battlefront II compares favorably to the PS2 version, and I plan to buy R&C: Size Matters as soon as it's under $30.

Loading times are only really bad on older games and games that get poor reviews for such. Try Breath of Fire III, Crisis Core: Final Fantasy VII, Final Fantasy Tactics: The War of the Lions, and Metal Gear Solid Portable Ops. All 4 are absolutely stunning.

...and yes, I have Daxter too :)

Joysticks pwn for flying sims.

A joystick/rudder pedals setup is divine on good flight sims, especially in super-competetive ones, namely Aces High II.

I mean, think about it. You have a much better chance of coming out alive in a huge dogfight in an arena that supports over 400 people at once (over 800 on Tuesdays) if you've got the complete setup, which gives you the full range of motion necessary to get the most out of your aircraft. And yes, it does make those massive furballs of 40+ aircraft easier to handle, and a hell of a lot more fun.

I'm quite partial to the Messerschmitt Bf-109 (E, F, G, and K variants), myself, though I'll readily admit that I am quite better in the Spitfire, especially Marks IX and XIV.