The obligatory PC vs. XBOX thread...

FarligOpptreden said:
Wow, you misinformed (and grammatically-challenged) little twerp. I was discussing 1050"p" and 1080p with Keeper. Did they teach YOU math at school?

1080p = 1080 rows of pixels
1050"p" = 1050 rows of pixels

1080 rows of pixels - 1050 rows of pixels = 30 "glorious rows of pixels".

Makes sense, no? At normal screen sizes, a 17% increase in pixels will barely be noticeable in full-screen, high-speed movements, like games. I dare anyone to pinpoint the differences between 1920 x 1080 and 1680 x 1050 on a high-action game (COD4?) running on a 22" monitor, with 4x AA.
Click to expand...

LOL..no no no no no!

You are forgetting about the 1920 vs 1680/1024/etc... screens are wider and he is refering to the horizontal extra pixels.
 
FarligOpptreden said:
Panther's old. Leopard's the latest OSX releast, if ya didn't know... ;)

Seriously though - why would I create a thread like that? :confused:
Click to expand...

Actually Panther is probably a fairer comparison to Vista.:o

I got an Xbox myself because I got tired of pc's (and upgrading and hassles) and got an iMac.
 
i'm sorry to ask this, but how can you say pc's are expensive, and then go and buy an iMac? PC's are much more bang for your buck?
 
Keeper said:
LOL..no no no no no!

You are forgetting about the 1920 vs 1680/1024/etc... screens are wider and he is refering to the horizontal extra pixels.
Click to expand...

Yes, I *know* I was omitting the width. I was only referring to the height, as the "p" (progressive) only indicates how many lines of pixels are rendered, progressively, to the screen. Most new screens are 16:10 or 16:9 these days, anyway... Very few screens are still sold in 4:3 aspect ratio.

In his post, he referred to 1080p being 117% the size of 1050p. My post then said that, for live-action games on a standard sized screen, sitting at a standard distance from the screen, you'd notice very little to no difference in image quality, and I still stand by that statement.
 
Keeper said:
i'm sorry to ask this, but how can you say pc's are expensive, and then go and buy an iMac? PC's are much more bang for your buck?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't want to derail the thread as it's not in off topic.
But in short, I'm keeping the iMac for around 5 years, which given what I spent in pc upgrades and software works out pretty good for me.


FarligOpptreden said:
In what way - Vista being comparable to an OS 3 years its senior? :D
Click to expand...

:)
 
I'm a software developer. I know the inner workings of Windows better than you do, if I have to take a quick guess. I just don't find PCs complicated. I find them less desirable for gaming than a console. That's all.
 
Seems like a pretty pointless comparison in my opinion. The PS3/360/Wii comparisons are more "logical" (and i use that word lightly) in that you are comparing apples with apples.

Unfortunately some years ago (around the time that I started working funnily enough) I started gaming less and less and couldn't see the point of the constant upgrading of PC hardware, the battle to get things to run optimally and missing out on certain console exclusives so I purchased a PS2, my first console since the Sega Megadrive back in the early 90's.

I now had a gaming system that I could slap a disc into, have it boot up and be playing within seconds which was far more suited to the working man with only an hour or two's gaming time in the evenings. Weekends that were not too busy in terms of social life were dedicated to long sessions with various RPGs or frantic 2 player battles with friends while relaxing in the lounge.

The PS2 came and went and the newest, and imo best, console...the Xbox360 was released bringing all manner of new, beautifully presented games to my home's entertainment area and also a way to game online when friends had returned home.

I happened to have upgraded about 2 months ago and my new PC's specs are fairly high (Crysis and co. all run at high detail levels and @ 1680x1050), yet I cannot bring myself to fiddle around in order to play games anymore. I'm far more relaxed away from a PC screen (which I'm in front of for 8 hours a day), on the couch, with a wireless controller in my hand and gaming away with the precious leisure time that I do have.

I used to laugh at those playing FPS's with controllers, but I have to admit you adapt to it very quickly. Thats not to say a mouse and keyboard isn't still the best way to play an FPS. Given Bioshock as an example, I played it both on the 360 and the PC, with the PC controls making life a bit easier. Then again there are mouse/keyboard kits for consoles if you don't have a PC as an alternative method of playing an FPS.

Admittedly there are a number of PC exclusive games that I will make the effort to be play :)
 
Last edited:
Iwojima said:
Seems like a pretty pointless comparison in my opinion. The PS3/360/Wii comparisons are more "logical" (and i use that word lightly) in that you are comparing apples with apples.

Unfortunately some years ago (around the time that I started working funnily enough) I started gaming less and less and couldn't see the point of the constant upgrading of PC hardware, the battle to get things to run optimally and missing out on certain console exclusives so I purchased a PS2, my first console since the Sega Megadrive back in the early 90's.

I now had a gaming system that I could slap a disc into, have it boot up and be playing within seconds which was far more suited to the working man with only an hour or two's gaming time in the evenings. Weekends that were not too busy in terms of social life were dedicated to long sessions with various RPGs or frantic 2 player battles with friends while relaxing in the lounge.

The PS2 came and went and the newest, and imo best, console...the Xbox360 was released bringing all manner of new, beautifully presented games to my home's entertainment area and also a way to game online when friends had returned home.

I happened to have upgraded about 2 months ago and my new PC's specs are fairly high (Crysis and co. all run at high detail levels and @ 1680x1050), yet I cannot bring myself to fiddle around in order to play games anymore. I'm far more relaxed away from a PC screen (which I'm in front of for 8 hours a day), on the couch, with a wireless controller in my hand and gaming away with the precious leisure time that I do have. :)
Click to expand...

You took the words right out of my mind. That's exactly my scenario as well. Looks like console gaming is more suited to the "working man" than to the student/slacker. ;)
 
Never had a Xbox. Had a PS2 for a while. The thing is for me that my PC does everything I want a entertainment system to do. The prob with Xbox is, yes you can watch movies and stuff on a Xbox if you have a PC (for hardrive playback) Whats the use then?

Buying a Mouse and KB for a console just adds to the expense and doesnt support all games as far as I knows. My PC is about 1 year old now and I still havent found a game that I couldnt play. Not everything on its max settings but thats what I think you pay for the extra stuff that you can do on a PC.

Internet browsing is really important to me and a console cant do it the way a PC does it. What about writing CD's DVD's ripping music ect?

I my case I cannot compare a PC to a console cause my PC is used in ways a console cannot be used.
 
kaaskop said:
Never had a Xbox. Had a PS2 for a while. The thing is for me that my PC does everything I want a entertainment system to do. The prob with Xbox is, yes you can watch movies and stuff on a Xbox if you have a PC (for hardrive playback) Whats the use then?

Buying a Mouse and KB for a console just adds to the expense and doesnt support all games as far as I knows. My PC is about 1 year old now and I still havent found a game that I couldnt play. Not everything on its max settings but thats what I think you pay for the extra stuff that you can do on a PC.

Internet browsing is really important to me and a console cant do it the way a PC does it. What about writing CD's DVD's ripping music ect?

I my case I cannot compare a PC to a console cause my PC is used in ways a console cannot be used.
Click to expand...
I think the OP was referring to gaming capabilities only. I doubt anybody would claim that a console can fully replace a PC.
 
FarligOpptreden said:
Looks like console gaming is more suited to the "working man" than to the student/slacker. ;)
Click to expand...

Woooaah where did that come from? :eek:

Yep, you can't have so much time on your hands looking at the consoles "loading speed" between levels :D

I always thought of console as kind of childish, compared to the Techies on this forum that use PC's... different smokes, for different folkes I guess...
 
Keeper said:
Yep, you can't have so much time on your hands looking at the consoles "loading speed" between levels :D
Click to expand...
That's a false statement if ever there was one. Console loading times are relatively minimal and no worse than a PC in most cases.
 
But on a seriouse note, yes. Consoles are more for Manly Manly Working Men - I mean, look at the wii ! Some serious Stuff there....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X