PC vs PS4 vs XboxOne

[ComradeHX]

I dont understand how you prefer 480p to 4k resolution lol.

I never had problems with graphical artficats.

I seriously dont understand how someone who games on the pc prefers to play at a lower resolution with no AA.

 

His username is oddly fitting.

Must be trying to get reddit karma.

[Mush Brain]

lol re4.

You do realize there is a much better PC version?

You mean pirating? Cant be found where i live, and i decided that the GCN version is superior to both PC and PS2 ports as PC uses PS2 textures/effects and low res video.

[cesrai]

Guys sorry but I will reply and carry on this discussion tomorrow, sorry comardeHX and guy how cares about zappin the girl.

[ComradeHX]

You mean pirating? Cant be found where i live, and i decided that the GCN version is superior to both PC and PS2 ports as PC uses PS2 textures/effects and low res video.

It's called Steam.

I don't know which thirdwprld country you live in if you don't have steam.

You are wrong about PC version too, it had a patch that gave it those effects：http://www.gamershell.com/download_18764.shtml

And in worst case... you could just emulate wii version on dolphin...

[zappian]

You mean pirating? Cant be found where i live, and i decided that the GCN version is superior to both PC and PS2 ports as PC uses PS2 textures/effects and low res video.

 

Pirating?

 

What the hell?

 

Its on steam.

 

http://store.steampowered.com/app/254700/

[Mush Brain]

It's called Steam.

I don't know which thirdwprld country you live in if you don't have steam.

I have a larger Steam library than 99 percent of this forum on Steam so your attempt at insults is not working.

Ignorance is bliss sometimes.

£2 for PS2 version vs £15 for PC... right....

[Mush Brain]

I don't attempt at insult.

You insulted you own intelligence when you claimed it's not available.

Not available to my wallet, this is how im able to enjoy console/PC and still afford top end HW and dont have a stupid bias for one platform.

Then again i have a job and work 11 hours a day, im off today with a pulled shoulder, you are here as a daily routine of laziness.

Troll better.

[ComradeHX]

Not available to my wallet, this is how im able to enjoy console/PC and still afford top end HW and dont have a stupid bias for one platform.

Then again i have a job and work 11 hours a day, im off today with a pulled shoulder, you are here as a daily routine of laziness.

Troll better.

You call other people "cheap bastards" and now YOU WHINE ABOUT PRICE?

Mr.Pot, kettle is also black.

[Mush Brain]

My point has gotten through, repeated words are a sign of defeat young jedi.

[MEC-777]

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm going to move Linux once I have all of my games working under it, as a lot of them cost over $50, and I want to be able to play them before I move from Windows and destroy the installation disc. Of course I'll still have a dual boot with Windows XP for any new game I purchase that doesn't run under Linux-I need to be able to mod them somehow. As it is, I'm testing out all of the popular distros on my old 100GB 2.5" HDD.

Edit: I'd give up some of my steam library as well-if I didn't have so many games that I enjoy that don't currently run under Linux.

 

You don't need to dual boot to play all your windows games on a Linux machine.

 

The quick and dirty explanation: Install your Linux distro of choice (the more stable and bleeding edge will work best) as your main OS. Then you install your windows version of choice in KVM (virtual machine) with PCIe passthrough to your main graphics card. Windows will actually run faster this way (due to various reasons) and you can run all your windows games as you did before. It's easier to switch between OSs (hotkey combo) as there's no need to dual-boot. Also makes it easier to snapshot and roll back your windows container (VM) in case something f's up within windows (virus, malware or ?).

 

I'm making the transition over to this method soon (in the next couple months). When I do, I'll post up a tutorial on how to set it all up. It's not something "easy" to do, but it can be done and carries a ton of benefits over running windows bare-metal.

[ComradeHX]

My point has gotten through, repeated words are a sign of defeat young jedi.

Well you proved yourself unable to read posts above, so I post it again to make it easier for you to read.

You are welcome.

Your point was hypocrisy. It got through to people just fine.

[Mush Brain]

Well you proved yourself unable to read posts above, so I post it again to make it easier for you to read.

You are welcome.

Your point was hypocrisy. It got through to people just fine.

If you say so, the only thing here is that you have attempted to twist it towards your own agenda and that would be pushing PC as the be all end all whilst ignoring everyone elses opinion and objection against bullshit.

Love you too sweetheart.

[ComradeHX]

If you say so, the only thing here is that you have attempted to twist it towards your own agenda and that would be pushing PC as the be all end all whilst ignoring everyone elses opinion and objection against bullshit.

Love you too sweetheart.

It's not opinion that matters. It is a fact that PC is better. My opinion wasn't that PC is best（that's an undisputable fact）, my opinion is that console（this gen） is cancer and gaming would be better without them dragging everyone down.

PC isn't the end； Tabletop Master Race, real life = best graphics, it's literally lifelike.

I've already explained, you just didn't read.

This was about which one is cheaper, and PC definitely can be cheaper. Then someone less informed tried to claim console was better than PC, and he was shot down for his weak argument and opinion.

You are whining about other, extra, features such as emulators...

YOU are the one trying to further your own agenda（of promoting weak hardware because your opinion is that games look "correct" on them）.

And you have failed； your argument about res/colour got shit on and your cherrypicked example was a game that had better version both natively PC and emulated on PC... Then you flipflopped on your ideas and started complaining about price after calling others "cheap bastards" for not buying（not that you would know if they did） original system that was emulated.

I'm not ignoring opinion； I'm just rejecting bullshit. ；）

[MEC-777]

I still see people continuing to argue about which platform is more expensive or cheaper - even after I explained why that argument is irrelevant. 

 

The answer is; neither! Seriously! There is no simple black and white objective answer.

 

It depends on each individual, their situation and personal preference. Some people will use a monitor, some a TV. Some people will buy many games, some only a few. Some people will pay for online subscriptions, some will not. Some people want high-end hardware, some don't. Some people care about frame rates and resolutions, some do not. Some people care more about the games themselves, rather than the hardware it's running on, others do not.

 

Do you all not see the problem with comparing costs of each platform? It simply cannot be done objectively in a manner that is true to all users. There are simply far too many varying factors to take into account.

 

The only way the cost of each platform can be properly analyzed is on a per-situation basis. Certain question need to be asked of the individual; How many games do you typically play/purchase each year and why? Do you care about graphics, resolution, frame rates and do these things add value to a game in your opinion? Do you prefer to game at a desk with a monitor or on the couch with a TV? Do you value the ability to upgrade the hardware over time? What types of games do you like to play? Do you value purchasing games at great discounts? How much can you and are you willing to spend on a gaming system? Once such questions are answered, then we can factor in costs - depending on their answers - to determine which platform would actually give them what they want for the least amount of money. We also have to keep in mind that cost isn't always a determining factor for some people in choosing which platform they prefer.

 

We can compare hardware vs. hardware in terms of cost, but then you have to factor in potential additional costs (TV included or not? Monitor included or not? Online subscriptions included or not?) which are all things that can differ drastically from one user's situation to the next, throwing that comparison out the window - since it's not true to all users and therefore irrelevant.

 

I don't have a problem with polls asking which platform do you prefer, but I do have a problem with people continuing these endless circular debates, re-using irrelevant arguments and insulting each other over such petty disputes. It's just getting very tiresome. Yes, I have the choice to not get involved in such discussion, but certain arguments (such as cost) need to be killed and it's not going to happen unless someone steps in and at least attempts to clear up the muck.

[Victorious Secret]

I still see people continuing to argue about which platform is more expensive or cheaper - even after I explained why that argument is irrelevant.

 

The answer is; neither! Seriously! There is no simple black and white objective answer.

 

It depends on each individual, their situation and personal preference. Some people will use a monitor, some a TV. Some people will buy many games, some only a few. Some people will pay for online subscriptions, some will not. Some people want high-end hardware, some don't. Some people care about frame rates and resolutions, some do not. Some people care more about the games themselves, rather than the hardware it's running on, others do not.

 

Do you all not see the problem with comparing costs of each platform? It simply cannot be done objectively in a manner that is true to all users. There are simply far too many varying factors to take into account.

 

The only way the cost of each platform can be properly analyzed is on a per-situation basis. Certain question need to be asked of the individual; How many games do you typically play/purchase each year and why? Do you care about graphics, resolution, frame rates and do these things add value to a game in your opinion? Do you prefer to game at a desk with a monitor or on the couch with a TV? Do you value the ability to upgrade the hardware over time? What types of games do you like to play? Do you value purchasing games at great discounts? How much can you and are you willing to spend on a gaming system? Once such questions are answered, then we can factor in costs - depending on their answers - to determine which platform would actually give them what they want for the least amount of money. We also have to keep in mind that cost isn't always a determining factor for some people in choosing which platform they prefer.

 

We can compare hardware vs. hardware in terms of cost, but then you have to factor in potential additional costs (TV included or not? Monitor included or not? Online subscriptions included or not?) which are all things that can differ drastically from one user's situation to the next, throwing that comparison out the window - since it's not true to all users and therefore irrelevant.

 

I don't have a problem with polls asking which platform do you prefer, but I do have a problem with people continuing these endless circular debates, re-using irrelevant arguments and insulting each other over such petty disputes. It's just getting very tiresome. Yes, I have the choice to not get involved in such discussion, but certain arguments (such as cost) need to be killed and it's not going to happen unless someone steps in and at least attempts to clear up the muck.

 

Fairly true words. My consoles in the past 5 years have cost me 2000, all in. My PC has cost me 2000, all in. Thats games, subscriptions (on both); whatever. IF you want to get pedantic, my monitor total has been 500 (two monitors in that time) but my TV was 6000 (Pioneer Kuro for the win). 

The sad thing is that people assign a little too much of their value to the platform their play on, they can't handle it when people don't agree, and they go into rants against others in condescending ways over it, just because not everyone is saluting Gaben or praying to the altar of MS or licking Sonys tit or enjoy Nintendos fumbling of the online era. Its just sad, isn't it? 

[Mush Brain]

It's not opinion that matters.

I've already explained, you just didn't read.

This was about which one is cheaper, and PC definitely can be cheaper.

You are whining about other, extra, features such as emulators...

YOU are the one trying to further your own agenda（of promoting weak hardware because your opinion is that games look "correct" on them）.

You have purposely simplyfied what i said to work towards your own argument, the PS2 came at a time when tube TV's were what the masses used not HD TV, and due to the way a tube works, devs could hide imperfections with great accuracy such as AA and a lack of some texture definition, tube also shows better colours than HDTV natively thanks to dithering and the way that tube naturally works, there is also options on my TV to use a blur filter named colour red for some reason, which is like high quality FXAA thanks to the HW.

[FakezZ]

GO ahead, don't forget to include the OS also, monitor, mouse, keyboard.

Then include the subscription and TV on the console's price... (Also, uhmm, SteamOS and Windows 10 is gonna be a free upgrade?)

[Mush Brain]

Then include the subscription and TV on the console's price... (Also, uhmm, SteamOS and Windows 10 is gonna be a free upgrade?)

I remember my furst console was a Mega Drive II, it came after we bought a TV.

Damn i was 4 years old back then

[FakezZ]

I remember my furst console was a Mega Drive II, it came after we bought a TV.

Damn i was 4 years old back then

The first gaming memories I have is playing mario, but I do not remember the console it was on

[zappian]

I remember my furst console was a Mega Drive II, it came after we bought a TV.

Damn i was 4 years old back then

 

Nostalgia glasses.

 

Doesn't mean the original HW is better.

 

You just simply prefer playing on it because of personal bias.

 

And thats alright.

 

Emulation is quite real and powerful however and a great plus to PC gaming and 

its backward compability.

[Mush Brain]

Nostalgia glasses.

Doesn't mean the original HW is better.

You just simply prefer playing on it because of personal bias.

And thats alright.

Emulation is quite real and powerful however and a great plus to PC gaming and

its backward compability.

I never once mentioned that emulation is crap, i simply have an objectional view point that i prefer the original HW, it comes down to reliving that memory properly instead of attempting to enhance things beyond recognition, once you do that you keep aiming for an impossible goal and never actually finish your games you intended to play.

[Archangel1994]

I never once mentioned that emulation is crap, i simply have an objectional view point that i prefer the original HW, it comes down to reliving that memory properly instead of attempting to enhance things beyond recognition, once you do that you keep aiming for an impossible goal and never actually finish your games you intended to play.

So you would rather replay the exact same gameplay with worse graphics rather than better graphics? Also ýou don't enhance things beyond recognition. you just make it graphically better, the gameplay is not adjusted in any way, shape or form.

 

Also could you please elaborate on the "Aiming for an impossible goal" because that makes no sense to me whatsoever. Why would you aim for 5179081357893589135k resolution graphics and what does that have to do with actually playing the game?

[GrimNeo]

(its exited not existed)as i see people rage in youtube comments which they like

i wanted to know which is best according to you and why?

the pc or ps4 or xboxone 

Is this a troll thread? The answer is yes. This thread was created for flamming. The answer is solely based on the user and no other answer is the correct choice. This is a preference based poll as well. I play games to have fun and it's as simple as that.

 

Are u existed that u can stream games to pc from xboxone? What does this even mean? Are you asking if people are excited?

[Mush Brain]

So you would rather replay the exact same gameplay with worse graphics rather than better graphics? Also ýou don't enhance things beyond recognition. you just make it graphically better, the gameplay is not adjusted in any way, shape or form.

Also could you please elaborate on the "Aiming for an impossible goal" because that makes no sense to me whatsoever. Why would you aim for 5179081357893589135k resolution graphics and what does that have to do with actually playing the game?

You say worse graphics yet you played it before and were wowed by it at a certain point in time, now adding pixels to poly starved models and low res textures simply brings those issues to the foreground, what i meant by beyondxrecognition was not ruining that memory of your game.

It's like a Girl you had a crush on only to find a year later she has plastic surgery which you now dont recognise.

[zappian]

You say worse graphics yet you played it before and were wowed by it at a certain point in time, now adding pixels to poly starved models and low res textures simply brings those issues to the foreground, what i meant by beyondxrecognition was not ruining that memory of your game.

It's like a Girl you had a crush on only to find a year later she has plastic surgery which you now dont recognise.

 

You just described nostalgia googles.

 

Do you know what helps old games look better , just like they did on your mind?

 

4k and 8x MSAA,

 

I know because i played games from my childhood on emulators and it helped a lot.