Should I play skyrim on pc OR console? : V - Skyrim

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:03 am

Halo.

This could be easily remedied by bungie. :-(

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:46 pm

I'm just curious as to why more people dont game on pcs. Seeing how the prices are soooo low, and the performance is so high.

I did played games on the PC and it was awesome. But it broke. :cryvaultboy:

I know I can attach a Xbox 360 on the PC.

But I just feel better playing it on the Xbox 360.

The only thing that bothers me is that we will not be able to play all those awesome mods. :sadvaultboy:

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:33 pm

I'm just curious as to why more people dont game on pcs. Seeing how the prices are soooo low, and the performance is so high.

It's just harder to do, for a console, you need a small box that is cheaper than Pc's, and a Tv. When people think of buying a Pc it's sound more costly and sort of a long term hardware investment, where as a console is more like a toy....if you get me. Pc's requre you to buy differant pieces and stuff. Although it's definately worth it imo but the general public don't, they would think"200 bucks for just one little thing"

Edit--if you want it to be cheap you have to buy piece's yourself aswell. Dell svck for prices

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:24 am

I won't touch on this, but I value your input.

You didn't exactly hide this very well.

Actually, your goal seems to have been to waste everyone's time for several pages, and then to try and counter arguments about the PCs and consoles that are just about equally as misconceived.

You can't get "several times the processing power of either console" for "very little money". That's simply not true. You can build a considerably more powerful PC at a reasonably cheap price, but unless you sacrifice everything else in your machine for the sake of the processor you're not going to be able to make a machine that's got that much of a gap over console performance (at least in terms of games) without spending a decent amount of cash on it. Thousands of dollars? No. A thousand dollars? No. More than the cost of either of the consoles we're talking about? Yes.

And if it has an HDMI port, something that most (but not all) modern PCs allow. This statement ignores the general gap in convenience between hooking a PC to an HDTV and hooking a console to one - it's something that's far easier to do with the consoles, and if you intend to use your PC for anything other than gaming you're probably not going to want it hooked up to a large television (in which case you'd have to move it between displays, which would mean that a laptop's your only reasonable solution and that immediately destroys any chance of the PC having a price advantage).

Assuming that the PC version of the game is handled well by Bethesda, which isn't a safe assumption to make.

Pretty much everything in this pair of sentences is entirely false. PC games as a market are doing far better than they ever have, even if they can't compete with the consoles, and they're less successful than the consoles for a blend of different reasons that range from convenience to exclusive titles to severe piracy.

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:19 am

I don't want to spend money for useless upgrading of my computer, so I will play on my x-box anyways.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:41 pm

Well hopefully your xbox doesnt crash right before it comes out. Which if you have an xbox 360 now, then the chances of it
[censored]ting the bed before skyrim releases are VERY high. Seeing as how xbox360s have an average lifespan of a year, to 2 years.
I had 2 xboxs and said [censored] it once the second one died. PS3 all the way! Of course if my computer can run skryim on higher
graphics, then im definitally getting it for the PC.

I bought a normal xbox 360 in 2006 with Oblivion. I once had a red ring of death with it. :sadvaultboy:

Then I let it be repeaired and sold it and bought a Xbox 360 Elite when it was released. Hsd no problems since now. :celebration:

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 2:05 pm

Processor (CPU)
Intel? Core?i7 Six Core Processor i7-970 (3.20GHz) 6.4GTs/12MB Cache
Motherboard
ASUS? P6X58D-E: DDR3, USB 3.0, SATA 6.0GB/s, 3-Way SLI
Memory (RAM)
6GB KINGSTON HYPER-X TRI-DDR3 1600MHz, X.M.P (3 x 2GB KIT)
Graphics Card
1536MB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX580 - 2 DVI,mHDMI - DirectX? 11, 3D Vision Ready

PC for me!

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:34 pm

It's just harder to do, for a console, you need a small box that is cheaper than Pc's, and a Tv. When people think of buying a Pc it's sound more costly and sort of a long term hardware investment, where as a console is more like a toy....if you get me. Pc's requre you to buy differant pieces and stuff. Although it's definately worth it imo but the general public don't, they would think"200 bucks for just one little thing"

I wish this could change. At least it could serve to spook the console makers into not sitting on stale hardware. Oh well :-(

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:42 am

You see juneday thinks it's useless to upgrade, you could Toss your 360 out the window, upgrade your PC and you would still be able to play most of the 360 games on your pc, because most 360 games come out on Pc too, and another great looking RPG the witcher 2 is coming out for Pc this year, it may very well beat Skyrim....

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:10 am

You can't get "several times the processing power of either console" for "very little money". That's simply not true. You can build a considerably more powerful PC at a reasonably cheap price, but unless you sacrifice everything else in your machine for the sake of the processor you're not going to be able to make a machine that's got that much of a gap over console performance (at least in terms of games) without spending a decent amount of cash on it. Thousands of dollars? No. A thousand dollars? No. More than the cost of either of the consoles we're talking about? Yes.

Yep, my graphics card along (at the time I bought it) was more than either console cost. Next time I have need of a graphics card, I will put that money into a console. Not because I don't like my PC more than more but because, it just makes sense financially for me at this point in life.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:38 pm

Processor (CPU)
Intel? Core?i7 Six Core Processor i7-970 (3.20GHz) 6.4GTs/12MB Cache
Motherboard
ASUS? P6X58D-E: DDR3, USB 3.0, SATA 6.0GB/s, 3-Way SLI
Memory (RAM)
6GB KINGSTON HYPER-X TRI-DDR3 1600MHz, X.M.P (3 x 2GB KIT)
Graphics Card
1536MB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX580 - 2 DVI,mHDMI - DirectX? 11, 3D Vision Ready

PC for me!

Nice build, btw

If I may ask (and if you bought the parts separately)...how much did it cost to you the Intel CPU?

Yep, my graphics card along (at the time I bought it) was more than either console cost. Next time I have need of a graphics card, I will put that money into a console. Not because I don't like my PC more than more but because, it just makes sense financially for me at this point in life.

Having in mind you can get a GTX 460 for 150 €...I don't see the point on doing that...

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 11:03 pm

I wasn't thinking about consoles there. And domestic PC's have a single predominant architecture (or two, if we count Macs).

I'm not especially familiar with Macs, but I'm almost positive that they don't have a significantly (or even remotely notably) different hardware architecture, and processor architectures are very, very broadly varied on the PC (which is the entire reason why certain processors can easily outperform others with fewer cores and lower clock speeds - even looking at PCs specifically, a 2GHz Core Solo should be able to easily outperform a 4GHz Pentium 4).

That is true in all cases, unless the game is very low-graphics demanding. Most GPU operations can't be performed by the CPU, and if emulated, it'd easily take all the performance from them.

There's a good reason why GPGPU and GPU Computing is being so popular these days...even the most humble GPU's is far more efficient at floating point operations than any existing CPU.

It's absolutely not true in all cases. The demand on the GPU is very easily scaled (so it doesn't create a major barrier for most games), and there are several games that require massive amounts of CPU power to be able to run properly. Saying that GPUs are specialized doesn't change this, because the fact that there are certain things CPUs can't do nearly as well as GPUs doesn't change the fact that there are several things GPUs simply don't do at all and that rely on the CPU.

I agree with this. The architecture is basically the same, only with several new instruction sets (SSE, etc) being added over the time. And in this, I think Intel has the winning hand, supporting the latest SSE versions avaliable.

Basically the same between AMD's processors or basically the same as older Intel processors? Because unless you're being especially broad with "basically the same", you're wrong in either case.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 5:23 pm

i've had 4 360's, the current one had to be repaired.
1 Ps3
1 Pc which I bought a 8800GTX for it too (€120)

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:38 pm

Hands down, without a doubt, play on a pc. Mods are a huge difference maker over not having them. The mod community is truly amazing.

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:25 am

What do you guys and gals think the average console gamer (who has never seen pcs as a gaming option) would say if they saw a side by side comparo between the console version of skyrim, and a high end pc running skyrim. Do you guys know? Have you seen the difference? Don't care?

Again, thanks for the replies, and I don't intend to waste anyone's time. :-)

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:26 pm

Yep, my graphics card along (at the time I bought it) was more than either console cost. Next time I have need of a graphics card, I will put that money into a console. Not because I don't like my PC more than more but because, it just makes sense financially for me at this point in life.

The trick is not to buy the newest, best thing on the market. The improvement over something slightly older is typically minimal, but the cost is greatly inflated. My last PC got me through two console generations with a 150$ graphics card upgrade.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:58 pm

It's really more of a preference.

I will be getting the console version. I have an awesome TV, with an even awesome-er surround sound I installed this Christmas. Eventually, after the game gets a little boring (and I assume that will be quite some time) I will get the PC version, for the mods. Then it will be like buying a brand new game. The PC versions of Elder Scrolls games tend to have more re playability, via mods. But if you're used to console gaming, then the console version will do just fine.

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 3:19 am

I recently built a PC for ￡300 (Which is, over here, only ￡100 more than the base cost of either console, not counting accessories) using decidedly mid-end hardware. Nothing special, nothing fancy. It has 8 times the RAM of either console, and most importantly has yet to struggle with anything I've thrown at it. Crysis? Everything on very high, smooth. Just Cause 2? The majority of things on max, smooth. Vanilla Oblivion? So many FPS it's not worth quantifying. Heavily Modded Oblivion? Well, getting that down to unplayable levels took large texture packs, better cities, and several heavy shaders - but it painted a very pretty picture, and only requires a marginally less pretty one to run.

So, if you have a console, and don't have a PC anywhere near modern, and don't have any money at all, then go console. If either of those 3 are false, go PC.

Indeed, if you have to ask the question, the answer is probably PC.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:29 pm

god..this game is gonna result in alot of pc-hardware sales.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:26 pm

I won't touch on this, but I value your input.

Given that the input provided by me consisted pretty much entirely of pointing out serious flaws in pretty much every one of your claims, if you actually "valued" it then you'd either concede that you'd made a misleading thread for the sake of trying to promote more misconceptions or you'd respond to what I said and defend your claims. Saying "I'm not going to bother actually responding to your criticisms" doesn't feel like you valuing my input so much as it feels like a slap in the face.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:49 pm

Also, how big of a factor do you think the world economy has on the console makers decision to sit on stale hardware for so long?

» Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:58 am

I've played Oblivion and Fallout 3 for both the Xbox and a PC that I'd call mid-range. The trade-off was between being able to run the games smoothly on the Red-Ring-Of-Death-Box (before I got a PS3), or having to juggle between performance and graphics on the PC while having access to hundreds, maybe even thousands, of mods that extended the life of the games. The drops in framerate at times was completely worth it.

Speaking of which, am I in need of an upgrade? My specs:

Windows 7
Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.13 GHz
3.00 GB of RAM
NVidia GeForce 9400 GT

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 3:50 pm

I'm just curious as to why more people dont game on pcs. Seeing how the prices are soooo low, and the performance is so high.

Because of personal preference, really. People like to talk about technical performance and so on, but really? Most people don't care about that sort of thing. All they want is the game to run at a playable frame-rate and to not look offensively bad. The mouse and keyboard? Some people actually find a controller to be much better control system. You might think those people are crazy, but we're into the realm of intuition and feeling now, where your arguments about why the mouse and keyboard are, of course, better than a controller in all possible ways will strike only ever strike the other side as both totally irrelevant and extremely arrogant. Computers have mods, but consoles are far, far more convenient, requiring vastly less work to get a game to install and run.

The biggest factor, though? Sentiment. Console gamers grew up playing console games, PC gamers grew up playing PC games. Both have pre-conceived notions of what constitutes "real gaming." Speaking as someone who grew up playing mainly console games, I've always felt awkward playing games on my laptop. It just feels wrong (exception: strategy games; I was a big Starcraft fan as a kid and can play RTS games on PCs and TBS games on anything). This isn't a rational thing on either side. Most of the arguments about which is "better" are post-facto rationalizations, which ultimately only serve to stir up resentment. The fact that certain PC gamers have gotten it into their heads that all console gamers are braindead morons hellbent on destroying their precious deep, complex, intellectual games is just throwing oil on the fire. Frankly, I wish we could just drop the issue forever.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 11:04 pm

PC.

Not only did oblivion look great when it came out, but the mods and texture packs made it so much better. For instance, look on your xbox game. Do the windows glow at night? there's a mod for that.

PC gamer just put out a 'best of 2010' article and an oblivion total conversion mod, "Nehrim" made that list. It is a huge total conversion that makes new towns and a lot of other things. Like others have said, the longevity of eldersrolls games on PC is light years beyond that on consoles. Plus the fact that a $500 computer will look better than the x360 anyways.

» Tue Oct 19, 2010 5:00 pm

I think I've had my Xbox 360 for over 4 years now and it has never broken down, it has to be magical! (not to mention my first Xbox, which is still going strong after 8 years)

Apart from the fact that I can't afford a good gaming computer (I'm a student and have a laptop...), I would probably say that the main reason that I don't acquire ore build a decent PC is that I don't have the know-how to put one together. Embarrassing I know, but it's the truth. + I like my Xbox and the feeling I get from playing it