HL2 on Xbox

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » November 17th, 2005, 16:47

Grimmie wrote:Final argument:

The internet has porn.
You cant look at as much porn on any console as you can on a PC.

Discussion: END!

I have firefox on my xbox, tabbed browsing ftw.

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » November 17th, 2005, 16:49

Grimmie wrote:Final argument:

The internet has porn.
You cant look at as much porn on any console as you can on a PC.

Discussion: END!

Well with my chipped xbox and browser I can look a...

At least we all agree PC gaming is better

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » November 17th, 2005, 16:50

Joose wrote:Well, thats a bit of a bogus argument. Its not that you dont have to upgrade or patch, so much as you *cant* upgrade or patch.

Generally speaking games for consoles are released in a better state than many PC games because there is no option to patch later ... generally speaking.

Lack of upgrade path and a fixed hardware platform for consoles horses the game developers to optimise their code for the hardware and because of the fixed platform it's easier than optimising for the vast array of hardware options a PC could have. Games coded for PCs sometimes have lazy coding which doesn't make best use of the hardware and assumes the user with through more expensive hardware at the game to get a decent FPS count.

oh was the discussion ended?

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » November 17th, 2005, 16:55

spoodie wrote:oh was the discussion ended?

PIE TIEM!!!

pixie pie · Post by **pixie pie** » November 17th, 2005, 16:57

Erm.. I think the fact that HL2 has only just come out to the xbox and its been out for (How long?) Over a year on PC is a great reason to go with the PC gaming. And think about how many new maps and things they've brought through steam (Yes, as well as a few bugs.. okay, lots). And also, you've got a PC there is so much more stuff you can do. Hate to say it, you can get work done (Or pretend to while playing games), tell me a console that has a word processor/printer? None that I know of. It has easy intarwheb! Music. And all at the same time!

Woo Elephant Yeah · Post by **Woo Elephant Yeah** » November 17th, 2005, 17:21

Consoles will never "replace" PC's (especially Microsoft, as why would they even try to do this, it would be silly)

I think the issue here is that apart from gaming, why would you ever need to upgrade your P.C.?

If I never played a game on my P.C. again, it would last me 10 years I reckon.

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » November 17th, 2005, 17:23

pixie pie wrote:Erm.. I think the fact that HL2 has only just come out to the xbox and its been out for (How long?) Over a year on PC is a great reason to go with the PC gaming. And think about how many new maps and things they've brought through steam (Yes, as well as a few bugs.. okay, lots). And also, you've got a PC there is so much more stuff you can do. Hate to say it, you can get work done (Or pretend to while playing games), tell me a console that has a word processor/printer? None that I know of. It has easy intarwheb! Music. And all at the same time!

mrbobbins wrote:People don't buy consoles as PC replacements

Grimmie wrote:Discussion: END!

Woo Elephant Yeah · Post by **Woo Elephant Yeah** » November 17th, 2005, 17:33

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » November 17th, 2005, 17:40

Woo Elephant Yeah wrote:

Post by **Roman Totale** » November 17th, 2005, 19:59

mrbobbins wrote:You show the back of PC game box to a mum or young kid, Whaa? what's all this techno babble?, if all you need to know is it runs on A, B or C console it's a lot more straightforward

GAME have now started asking if your machine meets the minimum requirements when purchasing a PC game. They won't refund it now if your system isn't up to spec (though you could always lie and say it was a birthday present for someone and they already had it).

I've been in a queue several times when the customer doesn't know if they have the specs or not (usually a parent). Like you say, none of that hassle with a console.

Also to put things in perspective: you know that I'm not au fait with computers (understatement). People at work however think that I am some sort of technological wizard who knows all the answers to anything PC related (admittedly it is basic stuff they ask). I think game developers make the erroneous conclusion that all gamers are PC literate.

Post by **FatherJack** » November 17th, 2005, 21:22

Joose wrote:As for crashes and patches: You do get crashes. Lets not forget that an X-Box is essentially a specialised PC. Its not some magic code fixing device. If the code is buggy, it will crash. I have managed to crash games on the x-box before. Except with a console, if a game is released with a bug they didnt notice, theres fuck all they can do about it. But with a PC, they can fix it, via patching.

They code console games with a very specific hardware platform as the target, and you're only running a single application when you're playing them - most PC game crashes are down to driver conflicts or resource clashes.

To acheive the same thing with a PC game there would have to be a very specific list of compatible hardware, and the game would have to boot from the CD. Then, of course you lose all the advantages of having a PC version.

Post by **Joose** » November 17th, 2005, 22:48

OK then, hows about this:

When was the last time a successful PC game was ported on to the consoles, and turned out better than the original?

To be honest though, I think its a bit like comparing the Cinema to TV. Both have good points, both have bad points, and because of that, im going to stick with both.

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » November 18th, 2005, 10:15

Joose wrote:im going to stick with both.

this

and this

Post by **FatherJack** » November 18th, 2005, 13:26

Joose wrote:To be honest though, I think its a bit like comparing the Cinema to TV. Both have good points, both have bad points, and because of that, im going to stick with both.

Indeed, that's why I have both. Nice analogy, while things like the 360 have improved graphics and can play Quake 4 and CoD2, they're still just like a home cinema system, however to the novice, geting a game running on a troublesome PC can seem like starting your own movie theatre.

I would say that Timesplitters was a good example of the FPS genre done in a console style - it has that many silly minigames so tenuously linked to the main game it wouldn't quite feel right on a PC.

The PS2 Sims games while not being superior, I thought were console-ised quite well. They were much simplified, but a story mode was added so you had specific targets to attain in order to unlock objects - which I thought was an intelligent translation to the format.

Joose wrote:When was the last time a successful PC game was ported on to the consoles, and turned out better than the original?

Can't think of any, but there are plenty where the PC game was a poor imitation of the console game. The worst ever was probably Mortal Kombat.

I had thought Final Fantasy XI, but the console version was slightly earlier.

The football manager games do pretty well on the consoles, but not more so than the PC versions.

Going back a bit, Theme Park sold like crazy on the consoles - but it was poor graphically compared to the PC version, although lacked many annoying bugs.

Post by **Dog Pants** » November 18th, 2005, 13:31

FatherJack wrote:
Joose wrote:When was the last time a successful PC game was ported on to the consoles, and turned out better than the original?
Can't think of any, but there are plenty where the PC game was a poor imitation of the console game.

You could argue that Halo was originally designed as a PC game, even though it came out on the X-box first. Someone mentioned earlier that it works better on the console than the PC.

White · Post by **White** » November 19th, 2005, 10:24

so with this half life 2 on xbox, is counter strike source included in it?

Post by **Joose** » November 19th, 2005, 11:52

Dog Pants wrote: You could argue that Halo was originally designed as a PC game, even though it came out on the X-box first. Someone mentioned earlier that it works better on the console than the PC.

Only frame rate wise. As far is the actual game was concerned, I enjoyed it way more on the PC, purely as i didnt have to wrestle with joypad FPS controls.

Can't think of any, but there are plenty where the PC game was a poor imitation of the console game.

oh, no doubt. But while theres no PC->console games i can think of that were improved, theres plenty of console->PC games that were improved.

Jinxx · Post by **Jinxx** » November 19th, 2005, 15:07

Dog Pants wrote: You could argue that Halo was originally designed as a PC game, even though it came out on the X-box first.

Hell, if you'd been following the development of the game from 1999, you could even argue that it was originally designed for the Mac, what with it coming from Bungie and all.

The first unveiling of the game before Bungie was acquired by Microsoft did show it running under OpenGL on a PowerMac G4 and all...

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » November 19th, 2005, 16:42

Jinxx wrote:
Dog Pants wrote: You could argue that Halo was originally designed as a PC game, even though it came out on the X-box first.
Hell, if you'd been following the development of the game from 1999, you could even argue that it was originally designed for the Mac, what with it coming from Bungie and all.

The first unveiling of the game before Bungie was acquired by Microsoft did show it running under OpenGL on a PowerMac G4 and all...

No wonder it was shite and ran like a 2 legged dog.

Post by **deject** » November 19th, 2005, 18:48

Icarus wrote:so with this half life 2 on xbox, is counter strike source included in it?

no, it's only Half-Life 2. no multi-player at all, which I think is stupid.