Ps4 or xbox one and most anticipated games ?

[tsmirandameadows]

Oh I forgot one other thing: a first person shooter that isn't played with a mouse and keyboard offends the gods. It's just that simple. :P

Btw, I hope I'm not coming off as rude or snobbish. I just occasionally like to talk about games and I get a little excited.

[dderek123]

I'll just leave this here.

[Gillian]

GT6 and FF... pretty different games . Weird combo to like

I know ...

The Final Fantasy series, which I first played with VII on the original Playstation, just got me hooked. I just admire the effort that goes into those games but don't play any other fantasy/RPG type games. As for Gran Turismo, I race all my friends on the sports car forum I spend most of my time on and, IMHO, it's the best driving game out there.

[dderek123]

Oh I forgot one other thing: a first person shooter that isn't played with a mouse and keyboard offends the gods. It's just that simple. :P

Preach it Miranda!

[Gillian]

If you can make intelligent hardware selections, it really is no trouble at all to maintain a gaming PC that slaughters console performance.

It may not be difficult but it requires effort, which at my age and stage in life I no longer have the desire to put in. I don't dispute that a tuned PC will knock spots off a console whilst also being more flexible, but as an entertainment and media hub, which can be discreet in a living room, the PS3, soon to be PS4, is hard to beat.

And on the subject of console reliability, my PS3 has never packed in. XBoxes are another story, RROD etc. ...

[GroobyKrissy]

Um, there's nothing illegal about overclocking. It voids your warranty, but that isn't breaking the law. And why would I buy mid range components for a "gaming" PC?

One, the shift of AAA development to the consoles has crippled tech advancement. Sure, we'd be at a plateau anyway at this point, but the fact that games are still being developed for platforms that have basically 10 year old hardware isn't helping. What this means in practice is that if you have 4 year old mid-range components in your PC, you can still run every new AAA game that comes out at max settings with framerates AT LEAST in the high 40s. You simply don't need anything more than older midrange components to have a gaming experience that completely blows the consoles out of the water.

Two, this has already been brought up, and alluded to, but the games that are on consoles... kinda suck. PC gamers have been bitching about "consolization" for years, and with good reason. If you play a computer game from the late 80s, for example, you are in for a very different experience. Through the mid-90s, not that many people owned PCs. If you did you were probably an engineer, a scientist, a teacher, or something of that nature. In other words, computer gaming at that time consisted of people of above average intelligence, i.e. programmers, writing games for people of above average intelligence, i.e. the handful of people who had PCs and were smart enough, say, to get work done efficiently and well on a command line. So who was the target market for a computer game in 1990? Someone who was smart, who was happy to RTFM, who enjoyed an intellectual challenge, and who was comfortable with delayed gratification. Compare this with the target market for Call of Duty. The consequence is that games are much, much more simple and developers adamantly refuse to grant the possibility that their players might be intelligent and independent enough to not want their hand held for the entire game. Certainly not all console games are like this, but the majority of AAA console games are. PC gaming has suffered as a result of this trend, but at least we're beginning to bounce back with mid-budget, kickstarter funded games that are starting to reach market. I'd a lot rather play a game like Ultima IV, primitive interface, graphics and all, than play yet another identical "step above a rail shooter" console first person shooter.

Three, mods, usermade content, and flexibility. Look at the Steam workshop for Skyrim: case closed.

I never said overclocking was illegal. Upgrading your processor without buying new software... often is (read the fine print in your EULA's). Most gamers that I know of all have sob stories about how they upgraded their processor and then Windows stopped working so they gleefully told this big lie to MS to get them to unlock it again. If you've ever upgraded a processor recently, you know what I'm talking about... Windows, Office, most Adobe products... all will stop working. This means that legally, you should be purchasing new software every time you update your "core" system, which to most software developers, means your processor.

Ummm... you said yourself that your "current" machine is still running with "midrange components". In my mind, you're not a PC gamer... you're a person who owns a PC who happens to have a hobby of playing Flight Sims. That's just my personal definition of a "gamer" though. As I said, a PC gamer to me is someone who is interested in playing games and seeing / understanding the beauty of it... the way light reflects off of water in FarCry, the glare of sun in Crysis, the physics involved in a game like Battlefield, etc. etc. TO get that experience, you need to have the proper equipment... which is beyond consumer-level components.

Take this for example... "I can run any new game at max settings" is what you said. Your very next sentence... "Can I get 60FPS in Crysis 3? No..." Then tell me... are you actually playing it at "max settings"???? Perhaps in your mind but to a true gamer... No. Not going to be satisfied with 30FPS at 1920... that is basically watching TV.

I'm a console gamer. I have all of the gaming consoles (major 3) that matter and keep them updated with the current versions as much as possible. I have the Kinect, Move, and most accessories as far as the games I play (guns for shooters, etc.).

It is indisputable that for realism, PC gaming is where it is at. Play Metro in full 3D on a 27" monitor and just try not to jump out of your seat... I've done it. What I'm saying is that for all this bluster there are VERY FEW ACTUAL GAMERS who can legitimately say they have GAMING systems. Most of these people, if you were to go into their room, have a dust filled system that may have been state-of-the-art at some point but now is basically an iPhone (exaggerating of course). Almost NO persons that I know of personally, except for a few true "gamer" friends, even have monitors that actually give you an experience that differentiates clearly between console gaming and PC gaming (i.e. - 2560), much less dual $500.00 video cards that can actually do all the cell shading, texture mapping, lighting, FPS, etc. etc. that gamers want.

All I'm saying is that there is no reason to bag on consoles just because your preference is PC gaming. Consoles are perfectly adequate for the jobs intended, especially these next gen consoles. Saying that they suck because sour grapes that PC gaming has gone downhill (LARGELY because it tried to follow the music industry with DRM and etc.) is just silly.

[tsmirandameadows]

You are mistaken about upgrades voiding your software licenses. Yes, you often have to reactivate after major hardware upgrades, but you don't have to "lie to MS" to do so. You just reactivate by following the prompts in the window that pops up. If for some reason that doesn't work you call the support number, tell them you put in a new CPU, and then the support tech reactivate your license.

I run my games at max settings. What part of this aren't you understanding? Yes I could blow 5 grand and run a system with Quad Nvidia Titans and quintuple my FPS, but the game is still going to look the same, just with framerates well past the perceivable point of diminishing returns. If I'm not a gamer because I have better uses for my money than spending it on components that are completely unnecessary to get visuals in performance way out ahead of anything on a console, then I guess console "gamers" are disqualified from the label by default.

[tsmirandameadows]

It may not be difficult but it requires effort, which at my age and stage in life I no longer have the desire to put in. I don't dispute that a tuned PC will knock spots off a console whilst also being more flexible, but as an entertainment and media hub, which can be discreet in a living room, the PS3, soon to be PS4, is hard to beat.

And on the subject of console reliability, my PS3 has never packed in. XBoxes are another story, RROD etc. ...

Again I feel like this is an overblown difficulty. Do you not make purchases of products where you have more than 2.5 choices? What do you do when you need a new car, or a new TV, or something of that nature? Do you throw your hand up in defeat because at your stage of life it's too much trouble to do some product research and shop around? Shopping for a new motherboard and CPU is no different than shopping for a new car; arguably it's a lot easier because the money being considered is a lot less so you don't feel so much like you have to make the perfect choice.

[tsmirandameadows]

Again I hope I'm not getting too snarky or coming off as abrasive here. That's not my intent at all!

[GroobyKrissy]

Oh I forgot one other thing: a first person shooter that isn't played with a mouse and keyboard offends the gods. It's just that simple. :P

Btw, I hope I'm not coming off as rude or snobbish. I just occasionally like to talk about games and I get a little excited.

Oh, I totally agree with you on this. It is a much better experience.

I'm not opposed to PC gaming... it just isn't my preference these days and I don't see the need to disparage console gamers / systems... unless you practice what you preach and have a system that is tricked out for gaming AND UTILIZE IT AS SUCH... By what you've written thus far, it doesn't appear that way at all.

System specs please?

As for the last, likewise. I don't intend to get all worked up about this either... it's an interesting discussion and hope we can keep it as such .