First of all, the screens YOU posted of PlanetSide were previews as well. Try not to cast stones when your living in a glass house.Originally posted by "Sp!ke":
. YOU ignored the fact that those screens you showed me were PREVIEWS. Previews doesnt = Final product, it dosnt even prove that it is a console doing the rendering. I tried a comparison with a very similar game that existet on BOTH formats, but you ignored them and said; "uhh, well tothegame cant make screenies.."
Secondly, if you truly believe that previews are no indication of the final product, then I suggest you go read the reviews of Ace Combat 4, Devil May Cry, or Final Fantasy X. You might notice that the early screenshots actually look worse than those taken after the game's release. Explain that one.
Third, you obviously know next to nothing about game development. Developers don't even code their games on a PC, much less run them on one. Ever heard of a development kit? It provides developers with everything they need to code and run their games on the console. And as for PCs doing the rendering, I know for a fact that the screenshots of Outcast 2 are taken directly from the S-Video output of a PS2, as the developers themselves stated. I don't have hard facts to back up the rest of the titles, since most developers usually don't state the obvious, but it's generally assumed that console screenshots are taken from console games.
Finally, are you trying to tell me that ToTheGames has more accurate screenshots of FIFA 2002 than EA SPORTS, the company developing and publishing the game?
Like I said, you're reaching.
Well, let's see, just off the top of my head, there are action, adventure, fighting, platform, puzzle, RPG, racing, simulation, sports, and strategy games on consoles. That's a fair bit more than GEI ANIME, beat em up, and racing, wouldn't you say? Of course, I could say the same for PCs, as I'm sure you'll find at least one game in each genre in existence, so I guess that kind of voids the entire argument, doesn't it?
As you yourself have already stated, you can buy keyboards and mice for consoles, so... yes, I can have a keyboard and mouse whenever I feel like it, just like I can have a flight stick whenever I feel like it, and a steering wheel, and a gamepad, and a light gun, and a dance mat, and a pair of maracas.
Oh really? I could name quite a few PC titles that lasted me less than 10 hours, just like I could name a number of console titles that lasted me more than 60. It may be a commonly shared opinion among PC game players that PC games are better than console games, but it's also a commonly shared opinion among console game players that conslole games are better than PC games. Like I said, it proves nothing.
First of all, I know it's trivial, but don't confuse "low lag" with "lag free". There will always be lag over a modem of any sort, just like, despite what Microsoft may claim, there will always be load times on consoles. It may be reduced, but it's still present.
And as for LAN connections, ever heard of an iLink cable? Same thing.
This isn't a "my system is better than yours" debate. It's a "consoles are better than PCs for gaming" debate, as the topic of this thread indicates. Sp!ke here seems to think that non-standard, non-specialized PCs are better for gaming than standardized, specialized consoles which are designed to do nothing but. If he took into account everything that a PC could do (word processing, graphical editing, etc), I might be tempted to admit that PCs are a better buy than consoles, but claiming that a $1500 PC is better specifically for gaming than a $300 console that can do everything a top-of-the-line PC can do and more is just ludicrous.
-Keiichi
Last edited:
