«

[Gary_Oak]

I wouldn't say PC gaming is dying, in fact, I think it's prety much alive,emulators and the almost infinite amount of commercial and indie games out there are the exact evidence.

I must say however, that the PC isn't exactly the best gaming platform since you always need to upgrade the system in terms of hardware most of the time just to play certain games, and that needs money.

But despite all this, I do enjoy gaming in a PC, mostly because it's either cheap and free (abandonware, indie).

[jg007]

I don't fully agree with a lot of these comments , a lot of the new games are cross platform anyway , ie: xbox / PC -

PC Transformers

and the (more expensive!) Xbox version -

XBOX Transformers

if you look at the specs required they are not really all that high, I could probably run it fine with my £350 2 year old PC and most new pc's will only require a graphics card upgrade at most for approx £100 to be able to run it.

yes pc's may require an upgrade ocasionally but the 360 will not be the same great machine in two years time either! and just look at all the pc games out on the internet and shops going for great prices which balances it out.

for me a PC beats a console no problems as it is much more versatile. I don't have a 360 and don't really need one. the only thing I don't have is a big screen but if I really wanted to I could get one.

all just my opinion so lots of people will probably disagree

[chumloofah]

Apart from the wizards at sony who're charging, last time I checked, a couple of million pounds for the ps3, the consoles take a whole lot less investment than a pc.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE("jg007")</div>

and most new pc's will only require a graphics card upgrade at most for approx £100 to be able to run it.
I should probably mention I'm an eccentric millionaire.[/b]

Spot me a tenner, buddy? k:

[Blood-Pigggy]

According to the game community the only games worth owning are those that tax your hardware, because that's what the mentality of the PC industry is.

@Tulac - My point was that Thief required you to do things that actually involved, I don't know, being clever? Tenchu was very base, even more so than the first Metal Gear Solid.

[jg007]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(chumloofah @ Sep 7 2007, 07:40 PM) [snapback]309586[/snapback]</div>

Apart from the wizards at sony who're charging, last time I checked, a couple of million pounds for the ps3, the consoles take a whole lot less investment than a pc.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE("jg007")

and most new pc's will only require a graphics card upgrade at most for approx £100 to be able to run it.
I should probably mention I'm an eccentric millionaire.[/b]

Spot me a tenner, buddy? k:
[/b][/quote]

hey I probably have less cash than you :bleh: but as I use my PC anyway £100 would still be less than me buying a ps3 or xbox and the games certainly cost me less!

as said my pc is 2-3 years old and plays quake 4 , settlers 6 etc without any problems at all I don't buy many new games but most beta's of games I try run just fine

[12turtle12]

Like I stated before, I hate buying a PC game #1 because I'm not always sure I can run it. I bought Dungeon Lords for $10 US a couple months ago, and it doesn't work, but Rainbow Six works fine, which IMHO has much better graphics, and #2 you can't return games for the PC because of burning. A lot of places still let you return console games if they suck.
Also, I have an xbox360, and I KNOW that if I buy a 360 game, it'll run. It might be a crappy game, but it'll work if I buy it AND I don't have to buy a graphics card every year or two to play the newest games.
Is PC gaming dying? Yes. I think so. BUT many games (classics like on Abandonia ) will be embalmed and dug up many many years from now for great games. Master of Magic being one that I have played probably 30+ hours in the last 3 weeks!

[Tito]

Well, the main reason I find to say that Pc Gaming is not dying is the fact that this kind of argument (that is, new games suck in comparison to old ones, consoles are better for gaming than computers, etc.) has been held for... five years? Maybe ten? I remember this same subject in a magazine by the time Zelda: Ocarina of Time came out, and it was already an old story. And Pc Gaming still remains alive.

[Blood-Pigggy]

It's been an issue for awhile, but it's never been as evident as it is now.
Really, back in 1998 (When Ocarina Of Time was released) the industry was a lot different than it is today.

My belief is that it was headed down hill around 2002-2003 for sure when Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 were on the horizon and EVERYONE wanted to make a shooter that could be better or look better than those two games, it only became entirely evident in 2004 where a unbelievable amount of shooters clogged the system.

[Tito]

The only difference I see then is that the industry is bigger. Lots of FPS followed the apparition of the first Quake, as lots of RTS did with Command & Conquer. Now games are a bigger bussines, so everything takes place in a bigger scale (affecting both Pcs and consoles). So, a good game will be imitated by ten companies with crappy ones, while in the past only five did so. But I still fail to see how can that kill Pc Gaming.

[Eagle of Fire]

It could kill the PC gaming business in the long run because if you have one good game for 5 other bad games, it's not that bad... When you have 10 bad games for only one good, it's way too much. And it's probably not spotting there, soon many people will simply lose interest and look at their PC thinking that it's not worth the hassle...