XBL vs PSN
+9
Rotaretilbo
Death no More
PiEdude
squirrelboy
Indecisive One.
CivBase
Nocbl2
Ukurse
laxspartan007
13 posters
Page 1 of 1
XBL or PSN
XBL vs PSN
yes we have a topic for this, but a poll will show what is more prefered...
laxspartan007- Minion
- Number of posts : 1272
Age : 28
Location : Embry Riddle Aeronutical University
Registration date : 2009-02-09
Re: XBL vs PSN
A onesided poll so far.
Ukurse- Minion
- Number of posts : 1441
Age : 29
Location : Auckland, New Zealand
Registration date : 2009-01-12
Nocbl2- Lord's Personal Minion
- Number of posts : 4814
Age : 25
Location : California
Registration date : 2009-03-18
Re: XBL vs PSN
Hahaha. Go XBL.
Indecisive One.- Minion
- Number of posts : 349
Age : 29
Location : Canton Ohio
Registration date : 2010-03-22
Re: XBL vs PSN
i voted PSN. im sorry guys. My brother has a PS3 and when i see him play online, i really dont see a difference between the two, other then the fact that PSN is free.
squirrelboy- Minion
- Number of posts : 123
Age : 30
Location : socal
Registration date : 2008-07-07
Re: XBL vs PSN
X
Box
Live.
Even though you have to pay for it.
Box
Live.
Even though you have to pay for it.
PiEdude- Crimson Jester
- Number of posts : 4573
Age : 31
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24
Re: XBL vs PSN
lol at the person who voted for PSN
Death no More- Lord's Personal Minion
- Number of posts : 2178
Age : 29
Location : Spreading Holy convergence in the sprawl.
Registration date : 2009-03-29
Re: XBL vs PSN
/threadRotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN
czar- Minion
- Number of posts : 570
Age : 29
Location : ohio
Registration date : 2009-04-21
Re: XBL vs PSN
Rotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN
I still have to disagree.
PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
PiEdude- Crimson Jester
- Number of posts : 4573
Age : 31
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24
Re: XBL vs PSN
PCs are better at everything except fighting and racing games. Unless you get a cheap usb controller, then it is ultimate.PiEdude wrote:Rotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN
I still have to disagree.
PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
czar- Minion
- Number of posts : 570
Age : 29
Location : ohio
Registration date : 2009-04-21
Re: XBL vs PSN
they are Equal to me, besides there are no sqeekers on PSN
Vtrooper- Crimson Henchmen
- Number of posts : 2885
Location : The reaches of Space
Registration date : 2008-07-10
Re: XBL vs PSN
czar wrote:PCs are better at everything except fighting and racing games. Unless you get a cheap usb controller, then it is ultimate.PiEdude wrote:Rotaretilbo wrote:PC > XBL + PSN
I still have to disagree.
PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
Again, I disagree.
PiEdude- Crimson Jester
- Number of posts : 4573
Age : 31
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24
Re: XBL vs PSN
PiEdude wrote:I still have to disagree.
PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
Pick up a game not ported from console, like any Battlefield game pre-Bad Company 2 that DICE has put out (Bad Company 2 is a good game too, but not up to par for PC shooters). When it comes right down to it, console FPS are all shit. The problem is that the console FPS market is so shitty that even shit can look like a Kobe beef steak to a console gamer. That's why, when you port these shitty games to PC, they are shit when compared to actual PC shooters.
There are a handful of exceptions, like Bio Shock, but that's mostly because Bio Shock is more focused on story and less on hardcore shooting whatnot. Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 are both Counter Strike clones with a few perks.
And can you believe there are people out there saying DICE is copying Treyarch by announcing Bad Company 2: Vietnam? Aside from the fact that DICE has been planning on making the game for three years now, Battlefield Vietnam, the precursor of Bad Company 2: Vietnam (Battlefield Vietnam is to Bad Company 2: Vietnam as Battlefield 1942 is to Battlefield 1943; BC2V is going to be Battlefield Vietnam on the Frostbite engine with fewer maps and fewer players per server).
Re: XBL vs PSN
Rotaretilbo wrote:PiEdude wrote:I still have to disagree.
PC is great for RTS and anything by Valve, but I've played a lot of other shooters on the PC, and I definitely prefer a console.
Pick up a game not ported from console, like any Battlefield game pre-Bad Company 2 that DICE has put out (Bad Company 2 is a good game too, but not up to par for PC shooters). When it comes right down to it, console FPS are all shit. The problem is that the console FPS market is so shitty that even shit can look like a Kobe beef steak to a console gamer. That's why, when you port these shitty games to PC, they are shit when compared to actual PC shooters.
There are a handful of exceptions, like Bio Shock, but that's mostly because Bio Shock is more focused on story and less on hardcore shooting whatnot. Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 are both Counter Strike clones with a few perks.
And can you believe there are people out there saying DICE is copying Treyarch by announcing Bad Company 2: Vietnam? Aside from the fact that DICE has been planning on making the game for three years now, Battlefield Vietnam, the precursor of Bad Company 2: Vietnam (Battlefield Vietnam is to Bad Company 2: Vietnam as Battlefield 1942 is to Battlefield 1943; BC2V is going to be Battlefield Vietnam on the Frostbite engine with fewer maps and fewer players per server).
I still disagree.
I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.
And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.
PiEdude- Crimson Jester
- Number of posts : 4573
Age : 31
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24
Re: XBL vs PSN
PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.
I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.
And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.
http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps
In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.
Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.
Elabajaba- Crimson Epileptic
- Number of posts : 1114
Age : 29
Location : Canada
Registration date : 2009-06-07
Re: XBL vs PSN
Elabajaba wrote:PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.
I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.
And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.
http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps
In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.
Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.
Almost all of this involves paying $$$, which I do not have.
PiEdude- Crimson Jester
- Number of posts : 4573
Age : 31
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24
Re: XBL vs PSN
Then PC gaming is not for you.PiEdude wrote:Elabajaba wrote:PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.
I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.
And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.
http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps
In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.
Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.
Almost all of this involves paying $$$, which I do not have.
czar- Minion
- Number of posts : 570
Age : 29
Location : ohio
Registration date : 2009-04-21
Re: XBL vs PSN
Exactly my point this entire time.czar wrote:Then PC gaming is not for you.PiEdude wrote:Elabajaba wrote:PiEdude wrote:
I still disagree.
I've played plenty of demos for straight PC FPS's in the past (another problem I have with PC gaming is that you have to install each and every game, which takes up space) and I still just like console better.
And I really don't have to explain myself. It's just my opinion that I like playing console FPS's more. I never said they were better, I just prefer them. There's no installation, less lag (my computer's not a gaming computer, even with the new RAM and graphics card), and I get to pull a trigger on a 360 controller, which is just more satisfying to me in a shooter.
I've tried hooking the controller to the computer before with the USB, but it doesn't work for some reason, and I really don't care to figure it out. PC has its virtues, sure, but what I'm not going to say is that the console doesn't have any. Because it does.
http://home.novint.com/products/pistol_grips.php
It has a pistol grip, and trigger. In terms of installing games, 5 minutes isn't very long, and since its installed it loads faster, which makes up for the fact you have to install. It isn't very hard to have a gaming computer these days, for close to the price of a console you can have a computer which plays every game out there on high without lag.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_a_500_pc_play_crysis_40fps
In terms of plugging a controller in, you just need the drivers for it.
Games look better on pc, with a decent pc like the one linked above, you'll run everything with no lag and it will look better than what it would on a console.
Almost all of this involves paying $$$, which I do not have.
PiEdude- Crimson Jester
- Number of posts : 4573
Age : 31
Location : In the middle of a hollowed crust.
Registration date : 2008-03-24
Re: XBL vs PSN
Lern2save.
Angatar- Lord's Personal Minion
- Number of posts : 3862
Age : 28
Location : Long Island
Registration date : 2008-07-18
Re: XBL vs PSN
Console shooters are not evolving NEAR as rapidly as they should be... but they're not all crap. Yah, MW and MW2 were major letdowns - perhaps even a step backwards - and should not receive anything like the praise they've been getting... but they're still fun in moderation.
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|