There is often a stigma between console and PC gamers (particularly PC towards consoles). Where a lot of stereotypes held between the two forms, often seen as resentment, I do not know why this is. If a game is only released on consoles a lot of complaints will be made (a recent occurrence of this would be Brutal Legend). I myself have been a both a console and PC gamer, so have experienced both sides of this situation. In-between the current generation and the previous I primarily became a PC gamer, playing many shooters, real time strategy games among other games, I wished I could play some games which were console exclusive, but at that current point in time it was an impossibility.
The problem I see with this is that the games which are the problem are either reasonably niche or they are unlikely to work nearly as well on the opposing platform. Particularly with hardware between generations of console and PC hardware becoming increasingly similar in their architecture, with the strongest difference being the default interface, a decent mouse will give better precision than any current analogue stick, yet an analogue stick will give more accuracy than a standard ‘wasd’ movement key set. The advantage in particular with a PC would be the possibility of the use of ‘hot keys’ making both MMO RPGs and real time strategies ideal for use with the mouse and the keyboard, but with the flexibility with a platformer or other 3rd person game the controller is still the ideal medium to control your character. Some may continue to argue this is incorrect, but how many gamers will spend that much more to add controllers on the PC on top of the actual cost of a gaming PC, a good keyboard, a decent mouse among all the other necessary peripherals.
Often a PC gamer will claim that a console game requires no ‘skill’, which I don’t understand. The majority of genres which would benefit with the greater fidelity of peripherals are often ‘twitch’ games, where one could argue that strategy is stronger in a PC game, I would not agree with this, particularly in a strategy, in a console team based game, a decent team can often do a decent amount of damage and will usually beat those in an uncoordinated team, of random people, if not those that have played together but have developed their team work less.
One argument A PC gamer often holds is that the console will always have a maximum capability, yet a PC can always be upgraded, where the console gamer always has the retort that a game for a specific console will always work. Often those that had both were considered Spoilt, or greedy.
The main problem I see with this is the amount of bigotry held between people for using a different system to play games on, I wonder why this is? People don’t say “I am better than you because I use a Sony CD player but you use a Panasonic” do they? There is no similar bigotry between other things, so why do we have it in games? There may be a slight rivalry between brands, due to preference, but not for any legitimate reason whatsoever.
With a medium which is still fairly young, I believe there should be a common comradery between most if not all gamers. There seems to be a belief or want that every game released could be released on one console but with the concept of non-video games, this is never the case, not all games can be played on a standard deck of cards, yet if you haven’t got a standard deck you cannot play every game ever; so why think the same with video games... Another point I can make is the same argument with different consoles.
|
If you look at the ages then it kind of resembles a family dynamic with the older PC group looking down on their little brother and saying "that's cute" especially with games like Halo and Gears of War. Which in my own play through translate very poorly to the PC but are fun on the consoles.
::facepalm::
Please read my assessment I wrote in the following article. I think you fall into the group of a console user who "might not get it". FYI, corded 360 controllers and HDMI cables can easily just go into your PC/television to simulate any PC<-->360 game.
Additionally, you can grab a top-end graphics card that can run anything at the Crysis level (higher than console) for around $100. The PC graphics market is saturating more than you think, and I think console users' argument of "graphics card=$300+" will gradually die out. Long story short, my argument is similar to John McDaniel's, in that console-centric gamers are more ignorant than PC gamers, and as a general rule, are younger.
My thoughts are in comment #5
I hate it when people put a pedestal on something irrelant.
PC gaming started in the Mid-80s as a potent gaming platform , Consoles started in the mid-70s , NOBODY CARES ANYMOAR!
Elitist PC gamers that don't use reason to back up their claims of mouse and keyboard/hardware/free content as opposed to paid DLC superiority for select genres are just as much to blame as ignorant console users :D
We all know that the TR3Y is for real mens of have money , womens and power!
At MAGNALON: That sounds a lot like ageism, also I never mentioned anything about $300 graphics cards, I was just putting forth the point that: those that only own a PC for gaming, have to spend a larger amount in total to get a good experience, it is undeniable that a PC costs more than a console. Also the amount of idiots in both types of system are equal, look at games like DotA, and HoN, both have pretty disgusting players on them.
At DAEDHEAD8: you get it, people who feel the need to argue over a silly thing shouldn't be allowed the right to the internet.
It's true, though. 9 times out of 10, if I meet a console user who hates the PC, he doesn't have a gaming rig.
9 times out of 10, if I meet a PC gamer, he'll have at least one console.
The ignorance is bred due to the fact that they don't own a PC, or game on it regularly.
Don't get me wrong, console owners (especially 1 console owners) can reach a level of fanaticism just as strong as a PC owner, but there's a level of integrity that comes with equipment like a PC.
As gamers, we're all equal. As gaming platform hobbyists, it's hard to deny the level of dedication and work that can go into a gaming PC.
Besides this, my friends are all console gamers and like Magnalon says they are in fact kind of ignorant when it comes to computers. So consoles are really the only way to go if I want to play with my friends.
Also, the console exclusives are too good to pass up.
But despite all this, I will continue to keep my PC gaming-capable because there are quite a few games you either can't play on consoles. Lots of RPGs and Strategy titles just work better with a mouse.
There's no reason to hate on either one though. People should always keep an open mind.
I'm not Shin Oni.
To re-iterate, I prefer consoles for everything but the FPS, MMO, and RTS genres, but nearly all of my friends/acquaintances, like Eternal, are ignorant of PC gaming.
Long story short, you're missing out if you completely rule out either option whatsoever. The only real reason to completely rule out PC gaming is if you can't afford it, but then again, a lot of families have a "family PC", and can't afford to get a console for just one of their members. So it works both ways!
Like Eternal's [friends]
*in my old geezer voice* Son, I was playing games on Atari and Caleco when you were just a gleam in your papa's eye. Got my NES in fifth grade.
I consider those consoles.
Also lets say that for a PC gamer that Iam Im not against consoles, I just want to play games. If Im mad against a console is because a game is an "exclusive" for that console. Which is stupid. What is the problem eith multiplatform development? Whats the problem? they dont want to sell more?
Programing for the 360 and the PC is more or less the same thing. Sony should be more friendly with developers and help them get their games to the PC market, that means not beign cryptic in programming code.
Although there's definitely a lot of value in being able to add more content to a game, and keep it fresh and exciting, that's just not for me. I like being able to take a couple weeks off from a game, and come back to it right where I left off. It's particularly nice if you care to split your time between a few different games, instead of feeling compelled to play just one game in fear of falling behind.
I think that the way that games age is one major philosophical difference between the average PC and console games, and what the average player is looking for in that game over a period of time is different depending on which side of the fence you're on.
In addition to the excellent point you brought up in regards to community generated content, don't forget to throw in one HUGE cog in the mix: free DLC for nearly every game ever (unless sometimes it's a simultaneous console release, lawl).
I'll take my COD map packs free, instead of $30, thank you very much!
Primarily because most of my friends have a 360, but also because I find the online world on a PC somewhat haphazard, I like knowing that I can put a game in my 360 turn on matchmaking and play a game, whereas on my PC I have to check to see which maps are being used, see what rules are being played.
I think the reason I have this problem is because I got Halo 2 around the same time as I got broadband, so that was the first game I played online for lengthy periods of time (I used to play UT on Dialup, but only very briefly) so my first forray into it was very well organised and easy to do, whereas PC is just every man for himself, which I appreciate works for some people, but not so much for me.