It's about time...

[Zen_Warrior]

While I realize there has been many threads made pertaining to this particular topic, I have not noticed any that had to do with the real issues at hand. Let me start out by saying that I have been playing GTA since 1997 on my PC and from the first day I was hooked. It was so revolutionary for the time and the obscure things you could do just kept you asking for more. Hell, I even remember the "suckmyrocket" code, but I digress. The thing that I am most disappointed about is that fact that if it were not for people and like me who pumped so much money and time into GTA when it was first released it wouldn't be where it is today. Rockstar has made billions off of the PC owners and PS owners over the years and I'm pretty confident that they haven't needed the extra money in years. The point I'm trying to make is how could they forsake the market that built their empire? How could they take money from Microsoft in order to make content exclusively for a new market who didn't even play from the beginning, let alone support it to its current state. I understand the business perspective, but come on! Throw us true fans a bone and if not for money do it to show appreciation to the people that have been with you since the beginning.

 

(For the record I own a PC and not a PS or Xbox. I haven't played GTA 4 yet and am patiently waiting for the release on PC. I have to be honest I am savoring the anticipation)

[Hart]

How could they take money from Microsoft in order to make content exclusively for a new market who didn't even play from the beginning

Just because some people own a console, doesnt mean they never played the older ones on PC.

 

You're being a bit narrow-minded..

[gta4freakk]

Well consoles wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the PC's . The reason they made it for consoles first cuz they're greedy bastards.

[nicotin3]

If this was my business and i called the shots i probably wouldnt bother releasing IV for the PC.

Chances are R* would make more $ developing DLC for both consoles than from the PC version so i dont consider myself "screwed" by R* like all the angry teenagers around here, i consider myself lucky!

 

I really hope the PC version will do better than SA (sales) but everyone knows how things go on the PC...

 

 

[cant remember]

Rockstar is a company, and their primary goal is to maximize profit, get over it. Besides, Microsoft owns Windows (which is the birth platform of GTA) so your "they never supported GTA thing" doesn't make that much sense. On the contrary, they gave R* a sh*tload of money for the exclusivity. Also, markets change. In the same way as gas inefficient cars are harder to sell as they used to be. It's just market's shift due to changes in technology, trends and prices. So really you should just get over it and move along with society's progress.

 

Anyone who buys GTA helps R* get ahead. And if it sells better on consoles than PC (perhaps partly due to piracy) then it's the console owners who help out R* to a bigger degree than PC owners do.

 

EDIT: and what the hell do you mean "about time we get what we deserve". Unless you pay money to buy their product, Rockstar doesn't owe us anything. Console exclusivity is a tactic to boost sales for a particular console and that is just how marketing works, it's not just GTA, it's the world you and I live in. If you don't want something, don't buy it. They're not owing to give you anything at all.

Edited November 23, 2008 by Niteye

[Rickzu]

Well consoles wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the PC's . The reason they made it for consoles first cuz they're greedy bastards.

I beg to differ, console gaming has been far more popular since the 80's. It has always been like that.

 

Yes, there was C64 and other legendary home computers of that time, but it has always been about the consoles.

[cant remember]

Well consoles wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the PC's . The reason they made it for consoles first cuz they're greedy bastards.

I beg to differ, console gaming has been far more popular since the 80's. It has always been like that.

 

Yes, there was C64 and other legendary home computers of that time, but it has always been about the consoles.

Yeah indeed. First there were arcade games, then came home consoles. And only afterwards they started making games for computers because they were more powerful than the consoles they had. Actually consoles appeared in the 70'ies.

[DML]

...but everyone knows how things go on the PC...

Yeah, everyone does know how things go when a cheap port made by third-party developers gets a 6-month delay behind the console version(s).

[amisnaru]

 

...but everyone knows how things go on the PC...

Yeah, everyone does know how things go when a cheap port made by third-party developers gets a 6-month delay behind the console version(s).

1. Are you implying that more people are gonna pirate the PC version now than if it would've come out 6 months ago?

 

2. It's not a cheap port. There are lots of features and additions that people should really be happy about.

 

3. Not really third-party developers either, Rockstar North is keeping a close eye on it.

[DML]

 

1. Are you implying that more people are gonna pirate the PC version now than if it would've come out 6 months ago?

 

2. It's not a cheap port. There are lots of features and additions that people should really be happy about.

 

3. Not really third-party developers either, Rockstar North is keeping a close eye on it.

1. Not really, but there are probably millions who will not buy the PC version since they bought it on the console 6-7 months ago.

 

2. I call it "cheap" because the engine they're using should already have a PC adaptation, and they've given it to another of their studios - one which probably has nothing better to do.

 

3. That's an optimistic call in my opinion. 'North are most-likely busily-readying Microsoft's downloadable content at the moment, so for all we know they probably couldn't give a stuff if a different team of developers turns the GTA IV into something resembling True Crime: S.O.L.A. I guess we'll know in a week or so.

[nicotin3]

...but everyone knows how things go on the PC...

Yeah, everyone does know how things go when a cheap port made by third-party developers gets a 6-month delay behind the console version(s).

No dude, everyone knows that a PC game is considered successfull if it sells 1 million copies, while another million warez copies are sold in 3rd world countrys and another 2 million are downloaded worldwide using torrent.

 

Great sales> great money> great budget> great games>

[amisnaru]

 

That's an optimistic call in my opinion.

All of your calls are awfully pessimistic in my opinion.

 

People (in general) should have a positive attitude towards the game before it's released, and only start criticizing AFTER the release once they've played it themselves.

 

Oh, and 1. a LOT more people would've pirated the PC version 6 months ago 'cause GTA IV was so anticipated back then.

Edited November 23, 2008 by amisnaru

[medfreak]

Yes there were consoles in the 80s and 90s, but the thing is, consoles were such a distinct and different experience than PCs. Games on PCs and consoles just differed so much, due to the difference in power and costs, that they did not actually compete like they are today. Hell we had network and internet multiplayer on the PC before the first console ever drew a 3D polygon on the screen.

 

Now consoles are just trying to emulate PCs as much as possible, and in reality they are nothing but underpowered outdated cheaply made overpriced PCs that provide for big royalty cheques for the company that created the console, be it Sony or Microsoft. The only exception to that is the Wii, which is the only console on the market that is actually trying to keep and re-invent the spirit of original consoles, being arcade family, simple made games.

[Rickzu]

 

Hell we had network and internet multiplayer on the PC before the first console ever drew a 3D polygon on the screen.

 

 

Debatable, depends what you'd classify as 3D. Internet wasn't really popular until 1995 and it took some years after that for online games to appear. early 3D titles were released as early as 1992 (wolfenstein 3d), 1993 (doom) both were released for the SNES and a bunch of other consoles. Granted, there wasn't any polygons in those games, but 3D, nonetheless.

 

 

Now consoles are just trying to emulate PCs as much as possible, and in reality they are nothing but underpowered outdated cheaply made overpriced PCs that provide for big royalty cheques for the company that created the console, be it Sony or Microsoft. The only exception to that is the Wii, which is the only console on the market that is actually trying to keep and re-invent the spirit of original consoles, being arcade family, simple made games.

 

Consoles are trying to create a cost efficient way of bringing the latest graphics to the every day consumer, so far they have been successful in this(except for PS3). You try building a PC to match a 360 for $200.

 

Really, some people actually do like consoles, it's the PC players that killed the PC platform, not the companies. As much as I love the PC and dislike consoles, there's no reason the bash them like this.

 

Biased rants don't get you nowhere, present facts to support your claims.

[TT1987]

Just because some people own a console, doesnt mean they never played the older ones on PC.

 

Exactly

[CharmingCharlie]

 

Consoles are trying to create a cost efficient way of bringing the latest graphics to the every day consumer, so far they have been successful in this(except for PS3). You try building a PC to match a 360 for $200.

 

Really, some people actually do like consoles, it's the PC players that killed the PC platform, not the companies. As much as I love the PC and dislike consoles, there's no reason the bash them like this.

 

Biased rants don't get you nowhere, present facts to support your claims.

Erm no it isn't the PC gamers that killed the PC it's Microsoft and Sony that have spent the better part of 10 years trying to kill off PC gaming (yet they still haven't succeeded). Both companies have poached franchises away from the PC and made them exclusive to their toys. Both companies have taken once great PC franchises and turned them into watered down mass market rubbish that makes the typical console kiddie coo with glee (Deus Ex and fallout being perfect examples). Both parties are guilty of using anti-competitive ways of trying to destroy any opposition to their toy.

 

Console gaming is pretty much everything that is wrong with the video game industry today, with it's mass market rubbish and heavily subsidised outdated technology. The PC gaming industry has to stand on it's own two feet, there is no one there to bail it out unlike the consoles. It is pretty damn ironic that even too this day the PC is paying the Xbox's bills really. As for building a PC for the same cost as the 360 erm just because something is cheap doesn't make it good. I owned a 360 and I found the performance pathetic if I had a PC that was playing games as badly as it did I would have upgraded it years ago.

Edited November 23, 2008 by CharmingCharlie

[Rickzu]

I guess you've made some good points there Charlie. As always.

 

 

Erm no it isn't the PC gamers that killed the PC it's Microsoft and Sony that have spent the better part of 10 years trying to kill off PC gaming

 

While this is true, isn't the reason behind this, at least to some degree, piracy. Of course they're trying to get the console sold, but it's easier to make a successful release on a console. I don't like what their doing, but I can see the reasons behind it.

 

Naturally we can't see inside their heads and read their thoughts, but I'm pretty sure they're not doing this just because they're money hungry whores. We're all humans, after all.

 

 

Both companies have poached franchises away from the PC and made them exclusive to their toys.

 

Probably due to the reasons above. It's easier to sell games on a console.

 

 

watered down mass market rubbish that makes the typical console kiddie coo with glee (Deus Ex and fallout being perfect examples).

 

Personally I thought Fallout 3 was great, I played it every day for two weeks, and still do.

 

Thought there's no denying that consoles have steered gaming towards the mainstream audience that wants easy games with lots of gore.

 

 

As for building a PC for the same cost as the 360 erm just because something is cheap doesn't make it good. I owned a 360 and I found the performance pathetic

 

Agreed, I've played GTA4 on my cousin's x360 and it lagged sometimes and looked awfully blurry. But it still offers mainstream graphics for far less than an equal PC.

[Madjoki]

Consoles are trying to create a cost efficient way of bringing the latest graphics to the every day consumer, so far they have been successful in this(except for PS3). You try building a PC to match a 360 for $200.

Consoles are cheap because they are making profit from games this is why games are more expensive for consoles than PC.

 

Xbox 360 costs around $700 (in 2005) to make, which is enough for good computer

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/24/xb...nent_breakdown/

http://www.joystiq.com/2005/12/28/xbox-360...ts-715-to-make/

 

Of course component prices are now cheaper.

[CharmingCharlie]

 

While this is true, isn't the reason behind this, at least to some degree, piracy. Of course they're trying to get the console sold, but it's easier to make a successful release on a console. I don't like what their doing, but I can see the reasons behind it.

 

Naturally we can't see inside their heads and read their thoughts, but I'm pretty sure they're not doing this just because they're money hungry whores. We're all humans, after all.

The reason for all this is exactly that they are "money grabbing whores". Let's just look at Crysis a game that has sold close to 2 million copies by now which in anyone's books is more than decent. Yet it wasn't enough oh no it isn't a case Crysis didn't make a profit it did the trouble is it didn't make them ENOUGH of a profit.

 

Microsoft are in the console market for one reason only and that is money, they already have the PC market pretty much sewn up so they don't need to worry too much about the PC. In Microsoft's books it makes more sense to sell you two things instead of allowing you to game on your PC. After all the xbox cannot word process, check email, browse the internet or do dozens of other things a PC can do. So even if you have an xbox you also have to have a PC with MS's operating system on to do the other stuff that the xbox can't do. In my own personal view if you added the cost of an xbox to the cost of a normal day to day PC you could easily get a PC that could do everything and game better than the xbox.

 

So far the console market has been pretty good to software developers though and I will admit that, but that is only in part because the consoles are heavily subsidised and where do you think most of the Xbox's subsidy comes from ? That's right the PC. Now guess how MS rewards the PC for this, it does it by holding games OFF the PC not because of piracy but because in their own words :-

 

 

"if you give people the choice between the xbox or PC version, then 80% will choose the PC version, so we have to hold games off the PC"

That was a quote from Peter Zetterburg head honcho of Microsoft Game Studios. So piracy has little to do with what is going on, the PC is being used to fund it's own demise thanks to MS.

 

 

Probably due to the reasons above. It's easier to sell games on a console.

It is only easy to sell software on consoles if you are absolutely sure you have a great hit on your hands. The costs of developing for consoles are extortionate. With the PC if you make a game and it is a minor hit of less than 100,000 you will still be quids in at the bank. If you make a game that only sells 100,000 on the console then you are basically screwed. Which isn't a good thing for the software industry, instead of innovation you are going to get Generic shooter cum platformer with beatemupper 2,000 just because it appeals to the mass market and they can be sure of 2 million plus sales.

 

 

Personally I thought Fallout 3 was great, I played it every day for two weeks, and still do.

Well I am not saying Fallout 3 is a bad game, I personally enjoy it myself but I will say it isn't as good as it could have been if it had been targeted at the PC audience. In many areas it has been dumbed down and prettified to please the console crowd and it most certainly has nothing to do with the franchise heritage. Basically Fallout 3 is further dumbed down Oblivion set in a nuclear wasteland.

 

 

Thought there's no denying that consoles have steered gaming towards the mainstream audience that wants easy games with lots of gore.

I totally agree, most people read what I put and think I am anti-console, in reality I am not. How people want to play their games is up to them. If they are happy to play on a console then that is fair enough just so long as I am not expected too then I don't care.

 

The reason why I am so anti-console is because instead of meeting the PC head on and trying to compete both MS and Sony use anti-competitive tactics to cripple the PC. Basically I want software companies to start treating the PC gamer with the same respect they do the console gamer. They treat PC gamers as second class citizens not because of piracy but because they don't want to upset Sony or MS.

 

 

Agreed, I've played GTA4 on my cousin's x360 and it lagged sometimes and looked awfully blurry. But it still offers mainstream graphics for far less than an equal PC.

Well the Gutenberg press brought printed books to the masses, now look at the sh*t we get like Jeffrey Archer novels and Jennifer Aniston autobiographies . I will agree that they bring low quality graphics to the masses but I wouldn't call them mainstream. The PC will never be as mainstream as the consoles but there is plenty of space for both the PC and the Consoles to co-exist but that isn't enough for Sony or MS they want to completely push PC gaming off the radar altogether and there are sad enough console kiddies on the board that will cheer whilst these companies do it. I just like to think I balance it out a little bit.

[TruXter]

We deserve to live and have a happy life.

Everyone does.

 

If having a happy life means the makers of Rockstar do or don't

make gta for pc. Then that is what reality gives us.

 

 

What you deserve is the right to get a job and work for a company

that makes the video game you request.

 

When that game is created and finalized, because of your efforts,

you get what you deserved.

[PestilenceJM]

This is pure business. And this is how it works.

Businessmen have te sell their souls a thousand times through their carreer.

Despite that, there might not even be anyone of the GTA 1 creaters left in Rockstar (and wasnt it "DMA" who created the first GTA?).

 

However. I personally think thats its cool that we will get GTA 4 on PC as it used to be, and im sure we will also get GTA 5 on PC. Im used to the delay since Vice City and i can live with that. Its not like i have been waiting for GTA 4 the last months from when it was released for Consoles... but instead i started to get excited as soon as we got to known when GTA 4 PC gets released. And not even much... it got worse in the past 2 weeks. Thats round about 3-4 weeks of excitement about the game. Isnt that just like christmas when we were little kids waiting for our legos at the 24th/25th?

[spudz47]

 

This is pure business. And this is how it works.

Businessmen have te sell their souls a thousand times through their carreer.

Despite that, there might not even be anyone of the GTA 1 creaters left in Rockstar (and wasnt it "DMA" who created the first GTA?).

 

However. I personally think thats its cool that we will get GTA 4 on PC as it used to be, and im sure we will also get GTA 5 on PC. Im used to the delay since Vice City and i can live with that. Its not like i have been waiting for GTA 4 the last months from when it was released for Consoles... but instead i started to get excited as soon as we got to known when GTA 4 PC gets released. And not even much... it got worse in the past 2 weeks. Thats round about 3-4 weeks of excitement about the game. Isnt that just like christmas when we were little kids waiting for our legos at the 24th/25th?

DMA Design made the game. DMA Design is now known as ROCKSTAR NORTH!

So... yeah...

Also - PC users have been neglected. And that's not fine because we originated and made popular something that didn't use to run well on consoles. Yes, GTA2 ran fine on PC while the PS1 version had only 25 hidden tokens instead of 50 and the graphics for the box sucked...

Take it like this - if the game originated for consoles and then PC stole it from the console fanbase the game wouldn't be as popular and played as it is now. BY THE PC FANS!!! And then you would say that we stole your game. Point made, thanks for listening...

Edited November 23, 2008 by spudz47

[nicotin3]

Erm no it isn't the PC gamers that killed the PC it's Microsoft and Sony that have spent the better part of 10 years trying to kill off PC gaming (yet they still haven't succeeded). Both companies have poached franchises away from the PC and made them exclusive to their toys. Both companies have taken once great PC franchises and turned them into watered down mass market rubbish that makes the typical console kiddie coo with glee (Deus Ex and fallout being perfect examples). Both parties are guilty of using anti-competitive ways of trying to destroy any opposition to their toy.

 

 

No dude, it was the market that (almost) dumped PC gaming. Before the xbox there was no alternative, you played your strategy, simulations and fps games on the PC and your sports, fighting and racing games on your kids playstation.

This competition betwean m$ and sony turned gaming into an overall more mainstream experience but the PC still hold its batch of exclusives, rangeing from mainstream FPS's to flight and other indepth simulations.

 

 

The reason for all this is exactly that they are "money grabbing whores". Let's just look at Crysis a game that has sold close to 2 million copies by now which in anyone's books is more than decent. Yet it wasn't enough oh no it isn't a case Crysis didn't make a profit it did the trouble is it didn't make them ENOUGH of a profit.

 

Enough profit to justify its development time and costs, possibly.. but i wont stand up for that unfinished pile of junk.

 

 

 

 

[CharmingCharlie]

 

No dude, it was the market that (almost) dumped PC gaming. Before the xbox there was no alternative, you played your strategy, simulations and fps games on the PC and your sports, fighting and racing games on your kids playstation.

Yes that is my point and how did Microsoft and Sony achieve this ? I will tell you by taking PC franchises and holding them OFF the PC. Remember Halo that was going to be on the Mac and PC then MS came along with their cheque book and bought the company. Remember GTA oh a long standing PC franchise then along came Sony with a wad of cash and all of a sudden the PC was out of the loop.

 

So basically put the "success" of the Xbox rests on a title that was originally going to be a PC/Mac title. The success of the PS2 which was largely down to the GTA franchise which was originally a PC franchise. Is there any wonder there is so much bad blood when all these consoles did was take new or existing PC franchises and use them to batter the PC into the ground.

 

It is no wonder the PC struggles in this day and age the format has competition from two companies willing to throw billions down the pisser for market share. Meanwhile please point out any company that is willing to throw billions away on the PC's behalf.

 

 

This competition betwean m$ and sony turned gaming into an overall more mainstream experience but the PC still hold its batch of exclusives, rangeing from mainstream FPS's to flight and other indepth simulations.

Like what ? I am a PC gamer but even I am starting to wake up and smell the coffee, just what exclusives except starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 (I will probably be dead in my grave by the time they arrive). There is no sense these days making a format exclusive game unless the developer is offered an incentive to do so. You can bet your life MS will be there offering "incentives" and so will Sony. Meanwhile the PC will fall steadily behind because no one is willing to stump up millions in incentives to make a game a PC exclusive.

 

 

Enough profit to justify its development time and costs, possibly.. but i wont stand up for that unfinished pile of junk.

Well whether you think Crysis was a pile of junk or not it still made 2 million in sales with Warhead probably fast approaching a further 1 million (no I don't have figures I am just guesstimating). That is still a pretty damn decent number of copies sold and represents a pretty handsome return on $10 million of investment. Yet no that isn't enough now is it ohhhhhhhh no, I am personally convinced it wouldn't have mattered if Crysis had sold 20 million they would still be thinking about going multi platform simply because unlike consoles there is nothing to stop a developer from going multi platform.

Edited November 23, 2008 by CharmingCharlie

[divinee]

no game that was on the pc 1st then switched over to console would of been big. console market is a better way of making money.

 

you dont need really nice graphics like crysis, crysis warhead, and farcry 2 has. when i played crysis demo i simply ignore how good it looked. all that was in my mind was this is boring as fck. to be a successful game imo you need a really fun gameplay with decent graphics in its generation. im not sure how much the crysis series sold but farcry2 sold 1M few weeks ago WW on ps3, 360 and pc.

[nicotin3]

 

 

 

This competition betwean m$ and sony turned gaming into an overall more mainstream experience but the PC still hold its batch of exclusives, rangeing from mainstream FPS's to flight and other indepth simulations.

Like what ? I am a PC gamer but even I am starting to wake up and smell the coffee, just what exclusives except starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 (I will probably be dead in my grave by the time they arrive). There is no sense these days making a format exclusive game unless the developer is offered an incentive to do so. You can bet your life MS will be there offering "incentives" and so will Sony. Meanwhile the PC will fall steadily behind because no one is willing to stump up millions in incentives to make a game a PC exclusive.

 

 

There are PC titles that are exclusive simply because there is no demand for them on the console, non mainstream sims like

this. And coming next year... Arma 2 is going to kick some real butt.

Im currently playing stalker CS (wich is a very buggy PC exclusive) and im having a good time exploring the zone .

Other than that all the late releases are available for the PC, FC2, FL3, TR Underworld... no exclusivity deals (other than M$'s DLC).

[mkey82]

 

1. Are you implying that more people are gonna pirate the PC version now than if it would've come out 6 months ago?

 

2. It's not a cheap port. There are lots of features and additions that people should really be happy about.

 

3. Not really third-party developers either, Rockstar North is keeping a close eye on it.

1. Not really, but there are probably millions who will not buy the PC version since they bought it on the console 6-7 months ago.

 

2. I call it "cheap" because the engine they're using should already have a PC adaptation, and they've given it to another of their studios - one which probably has nothing better to do.

 

3. That's an optimistic call in my opinion. 'North are most-likely busily-readying Microsoft's downloadable content at the moment, so for all we know they probably couldn't give a stuff if a different team of developers turns the GTA IV into something resembling True Crime: S.O.L.A. I guess we'll know in a week or so.

1. Also, PC sales with all the hype back then would be comparable with those on consoles. It is an multiplayer-heavy game, after all. It wouldn't sell 10 million, but neither did the consoles (separately).

 

2. I think it's more or less a cheap port. Previous GTAs were and this one will probably be the same. The only reason we have to think otherwise is because of what R* and sellout reviewers say.

 

3. The fact remains R* North have more important things to do then to make GTA IV for PC. Also, what kind of "close eye" was kept on Bully? It may not be an acclaimed title, but it was a pile of dog sh*t. Why didn't someone intervene?

 

 

Oh, and 1. a LOT more people would've pirated the PC version 6 months ago 'cause GTA IV was so anticipated back then.

A LOT more would have bought it for PC also.

 

 

Consoles are trying to create a cost efficient way of bringing the latest graphics to the every day consumer, so far they have been successful in this(except for PS3). You try building a PC to match a 360 for $200.

 

Really, some people actually do like consoles, it's the PC players that killed the PC platform, not the companies. As much as I love the PC and dislike consoles, there's no reason the bash them like this.

Cost efficient? Are you serious? There are reason why consles are "cheap". Allow me to present some facts.

 

1) Consoles (especially the early x360 release) break down a lot. ?It's because they are so cheap. x360 had a 30% fatality rate. PS3 seems to be stable, but PS2 was the same pile of junk x360 was/is. They overheat, melt, scratch disks... it's a shame there isn't any quality control.

 

2) Consoles practically demand that you have a monitor (which practically defeats the purpose of having one as it was made to be played form the couch) or big nice HD TV. Fanboys can lie all they want, but if you have a standard TV you didn't even have to bother with the "next-gen" console. HD TV's are expensive. My friend spent almost 2000$ on his setup (PS3+Sony 70-someting" HD TV). I got a brand new PC for 1500$. Do I need to compare that machine with my friends PS3? Reliability, durability, functionality? I will not even bother. Sure, there are console exclusives, but I'm only interested in playing GTA IV. And I will do so, in about ten days (god willing).

 

3) The games are a lot more expensive. If you check out sites like game, the difference is more then tangible. Some titles are even twice as expensive (I know because I was trying to find some games for my friend, as console games in my country are ridiculously overpriced - like 100$ and such).

 

4) The oh-so-precious x360 gold account cost a bundle also. Sure, you can go with silver membership, but you will lose out on those timed exclusives, won't you? What a load of bull. People really think all that money is necessary to provide such an "experience".

 

So, in my mind, consoles are not cheap. you need to pay extra care to how long you are actually playing. You need to hope your unit won't destroy your discs. Extra costs quickly eat all you "saved" in the beginning.

 

This being said, I don't deny people's rights to play the way they want to play. Jsut let's not talk sh*t about stuff we know nothing about, OK?

 

 

you dont need really nice graphics like crysis, crysis warhead, and farcry 2 has

f*cking epic.

[Rickzu]

- Wall of text -

While I agree with most of your points. I was talking about the actual hardware, not the optional stuff like big TVs and such. For your every day Joe the student $200 can be a lot of money.

 

Now he has a choise to get either a new PC or get a "new" console.

 

Now you're not going to do much with a $200 PC, right? I mean you probably won't be playing the latest games even at the lowest settings, and the thing has been obsolete for months before you bought it. While the $200 console can play the latest games...hey, it may not look as good, but at least you're playing it, right? (Online sure costs money, it sucks, but consoles were never meant to be online anyways)

 

Games being more expensive? True, most console releases cost over $20 more, and usually look/play worse than their PC counterparts, BUT in most towns it is possible to trade old games for refund and buy new games. While this won't get you an awesome game collection, it will help one save money.

 

As for the failure rate, it's not a fact just because you said so

 

 

A report from independent warranty company SquareTrade claims that the failure rate for Xbox 360 currently stands at 16.4 percent.

 

The first model x360 had flawed components, they've fixed most of this issue now.

 

And there's always the Wii, REMEMBER THE WII!

 

I also happen to have a release version PS2, still in perfect condition after years of gaming and working to this date.

 

Now I really, really don't like "defending" the consoles, but the ignorant biased elitist rants have got to stop, please.

[steveb07]

Charlie is 100% right. MS and Sony destroyed almost all good PC franchises out there with their unending greed!

 

On another note i can't help but notice that R* is becoming more like EA is now. Slowly but steady. Remember how EA used to make very good games (NFS, FIFA, etc). Look at them now. R* is starting to look like them more and more.

 

I can't say much about GTAIV on PC until is out but Bully (a cheap port as someone mentioned) is/was crap!

Lets face it...you want to sell the game but you don't bother making it for the PC; sure its easier to just port it from the crappy consoles now is it?

[mkey82]

 

While I agree with most of your points. I was talking about the actual hardware, not the optional stuff like big TVs and such. For your every day Joe the student $200 can be a lot of money.

I agree. 200$ is a lot of money. And for someone looking for a quick fix and to be able to play just a few games (while probably owning some sort of TV) that is a good solution.

 

 

As for the failure rate, it's not a fact just because you said so

I was speaking about the "early x360 release". That one had a failure rate of about 30%. It's all over the web, various stores have stated that about 30% of warranties get claimed. Also MS had issued a modified warranty (some 7-8 months ago) - "three years or three RRODS" . I wonder what was that about, maybe people got more then one melt job per year?

 

And still, 16.4% is a lot.

 

 

And there's always the Wii, REMEMBER THE WII!

I don't consider WII to be in the same league with x360 and PS3. WII is a proper console made for people who like to have fun in front of their normally priced TVs.

 

 

I also happen to have a release version PS2, still in perfect condition after years of gaming and working to this date.

ALL (and I do mean ALL) people I know have their PS2 consoles busted. ALL. About 20 consoles, they all broke after about one year of usage. But I have this theory Sony deliberately sent crappy units to "third party" countries.

 

 

Now I really, really don't like "defending" the consoles, but the ignorant biased elitist rants have got to stop, please.

"elitist rants"? People usually start using these terms when they run out of arguments. Point to one point in my post that was biased or just shut the f*ck up. Please.

Edited November 24, 2008 by mkey82