nesdev.org

I think comparing NES to the 80s IBM PC is fair, considering early PC was supposed to be so much more powerful but yet it sucked. And C64 games beat most PC games well into the 286 era. Still, graphics amd CPU speed are much higher on the NES than the C64 so the NES wins this contest as well.

Yeah I guess the NES was the best until the Amiga and the Megadrive were released... but then the SNES eventually came out and kicked their asses
(this might be biased through).

Bregalad wrote:Yeah I guess the NES was the best until the Amiga and the Megadrive were released... but then the SNES eventually came out and kicked their asses
(this might be biased through).

I think Amiga is better than SNES

There's no such thing as a generic PC, so their arguments are unfalsifiable and kind of pointless.

Maybe it's partly because PC-only gamers have little to argue or compare about with their equipment, except maybe graphics cards, so they just say "the PC will beat any of those any day".

Consoles were certainly better gaming devices than IBM PC compatibles before the early to mid 90s, considering before there were no graphical acceleration options available for them at all. Plus DOS was basically a bad 8086 port of CP/M, the Japanese did far better computers based on the x86 architecture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lefHUdcn ... re=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1thWKQEDcI

Presently, well, compare the gaming capabilities of a say Xbox 360 or PS3 to same priced PCs. Ridiculous PC fanboys always compare their 4000 dollar PCs to consoles. Compare a 140-250 dollar PC (same price as the non-S Xbox 360 now) to a 140-250 dollar Xbox 360 and you'll see what I mean.

Hell, I've encountered 2 Ghz computers - that barely run Warcraft 3 in 800x600 due to an "integrated" Intel graphics card (basically reducing a 2 Ghz computer to a 500 Mhz Pentium II). Call of Duty 1 lagged on those and they were ridiculously virus infected. Warcraft 3 run on my 1 Ghz Celeron machine I had half a decade ago perfectly, in high details and resolution.

All the underperformance of Intel's integrated GMA (Graphics My [censored]) proves is that an Intel CPU isn't the best choice for budget PC gamers. NVIDIA and ATI make better integrated graphics.

But what answer do PC fanboys have to the propensity of Windows to become "ridiculously virus infected" other than the console solution, which is to assume all homemade software is potentially a virus?

PCs run slower the older they get. This doesn't happen with video game consoles.

psycopathicteen wrote:PCs run slower the older they get. This doesn't happen with video game consoles.

It's more of an OS issue. A clean OS reinstall is blazing fast comparing to before you make this move, usually.

psycopathicteen wrote:PCs run slower the older they get. This doesn't happen with video game consoles.

Not if you take good care of them. My previous laptop lasted 4 years without requiring hard disk formatting, it was just as responsive as the day I configured it for the first time. My desktop computers don't usually last as long, I usually format them every year or so.

The trick is to use a sandbox or a virtual machine for everything that's potentially dangerous. Need to install a program you'll only use once (to convert a file or something)? Use the sand box or a virtual machine, and don't pollute your OS with any of the program's crap. Visiting porn sites? Sand box or virtual machine. Afraid that the keygen for some software you stole is infected? Sand box or virtual machine. That's always the answer... Only use the real machine for things that are tested and known to be safe and necessary.

Of course, in the early days of Windows Vista, Microsoft had to make that hard. Virtual PC wouldn't run on the home editions, and the original EULA of the home editions banned running them inside a virtual machine. I'll say Windows is secure once it makes it point-and-click easy to set up a jail for a single desktop application. But Microsoft appears to want to go in a different direction in Windows 8 with the Metro Style apps, analogous to the model for Xbox Live Indie Games and the iOS Developer Program, where each developer has to pay Microsoft an annual fee to run his own code on his own computer.

I believe it started with PC Gamer, "the #1 video games magazine", which always has been run by a bunch of jerks. They preached console inferiority like a doctrine: infallible and so self-evident that no evidence was necessary. They see themselves as in competition with the consoles, and as such they are gonna malign them as seriously as possible. Even today, the PC tends to be the place where the really experimental games, like McGee's Alice, find a place to shine. Also, PC games are mostly created for a completely different audience than the consoles, mostly due to different traditions in the East and West. Developers in the West could make money making JRPGs, just as devs in Japan could make AD&D clones if they wanted. But they don't.

tcaudilllg wrote:I believe it started with PC Gamer, "the #1 video games magazine", which always has been run by a bunch of jerks. They preached console inferiority like a doctrine: infallible and so self-evident that no evidence was necessary. They see themselves as in competition with the consoles, and as such they are gonna malign them as seriously as possible. Even today, the PC tends to be the place where the really experimental games, like McGee's Alice, find a place to shine. Also, PC games are mostly created for a completely different audience than the consoles, mostly due to different traditions in the East and West. Developers in the West could make money making JRPGs, just as devs in Japan could make AD&D clones if they wanted. But they don't.

I can't stand people who beleive one system is 100x more powerful than it's main competition, just because they cherry pick the system's biggest advantage, and pretend like it's the most important part of the system.