Joel Nicholas Wrote: Ok first off, the title: Video Gamer. Before reading any further, we know the slant this article will have.
(Video Gamer X: That sentance didn't make much sense...)
The first paragraph indicates the rest of the tone of the body of the article. Funny how the writer inirectly indicates that an Ati 9700 Pro and a 2.8 Ghz P4 processor coupled with PC1066 RDRAM can certainly keep up with many consoles�. Well there are three consoles on the market. A top of the line computer with the above specs more than keeps up with the many consoles out there. In fact it blows them away in the hardware department. (You failed to understand the context of what I was saying. You can play a first person shooter on a PC or you can play a first person shooter on a console, the end result is that you are experiencing the same thing, a first person shooter)The writer steps back in the second paragraph as he concedes that the hardware spec advantage goes to the PC. He also give a brief synopsis of the advantages of PC gaming with quotes like, PC gaming truly gives a gamer maximum ability to increase the capabilities of their gaming platform and expand gameplay beyond the initially purchased game with expansions and upgrade packages� and Players can also challenge each other in multiplayer environments online, and achieve more personal prestiege and recognition for their accomplishments.

Now that the writer has his pleasantries down, paragraph three is where the foolishness really begins. PC games just tend to always be buggy, he states. I must be in the extreme minority, but very few games that I�ve played have had any bugs. Recently I started playing NOLF 2 and it did indeed contain an issue that should not exist. When I bind keys, they mysteriously unbind every so often. This is the first bug that I�ve had in over two years. In that timeframe, I�ve purchased over 35 games. One minor bug has occurred out of over 35 titles. How does this make the writer of this article exclaim that PC games just tend to always be buggy? This is complete propaganda. (Well, you are likely in a minority few. For the most part, many people I know, including myself had endured many hassles with games on Windows based PC's. I have had numerious errors, driver conflicts, and crashes on various computers going back to the early nineties. I now own the best possible graphics card you can buy right now, and I still have two games that do not play properly on it.) And as if that is not enough, the writer misleads ( *laughs* yeah right!)the reader into thinking that gamers spend $1000.00 to $2000.00 for a gaming rig. (I just built a gaming rig, and it cost me about $1500, so what I said was true.) What the writer fails to convey is the fact that PC�s aren�t just used for gaming. His statement, How much time and money did you spend just achieve this? About $1000? Maybe, $2000?� is completely misleading and false. The average system from Dell Computer Corporation (Ha, ha, Dell is shit, any true hardcore PC gamer buys a PC from Falcon Northwest, or AlienWare.)with the following hardware retails for $948.00 sans a monitor (Hey consoles don�t come with a TV do they?). The hardware specs are:

Pentium� 4 Processor at 2.40GHz with 533MHz system bus/ 512K L2 Cache, 256MB PC800 RDRAM, FREE UPGRADE! 60GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM Hard Drive, Mouse and Keyboard, Software Bundle, 64MB DDR NVIDIA� GeForce4 MX Graphics Card with TV-Out, and FREE Upgrade! 40x/10x/40x Max CD-RW Drive.

(Laughs at those specs. Only 256MB or RAM? Yay, 60 Gigs, that will be filled in 6 months, middle of the road graphics card, and a free CD-RW, big deal! You can buy a PC that smokes this at Circuit City for $999.99 after rebates. - not that any gamer would buy an HP or Compaq.)

The above spec offers the bottom of the line video card and is a very average computer system. This computer includes a modem network card, and is capable of doing many, many tasks other than gaming. (You're stating the obvious, and all those other functions of the PC have nothing to do with gaming.)So where does the misinformed writer of the article, Video Games Today: Console vs PC figure that an additonal $1000.00 to $2000.00 dollars on top of the purchase of a basic computer system are spent for a gaming rig? This is absolute nonesense. Computers can be used for far more than gaming. If you were to opt for the top of the line video card at the moment (Ati 9700 Pro) you would add $320.00 to the above price. This is far less than the $1000.00-$2000.00 the writer states. He's losing credibility fast. (Generic ATX Case = $50, Average 300 W Power Supply = $40, 533 Mhz Bus Motherboard $100, Pentium 2.53 Ghz = $200, Radeon 9700 Pro = $320 (it's retailing for $399), 512 MB of DDR RAM = $150, Basic DVD-ROM $50, Western DIgital 80 GB = $120, Sound Blaster Live = $70, - I don't think my credibility is lost, do the math, Gaming PC's aren't cheap. Go to Falcon Northwest and configure a decent system. Console = $199 sans the TV, and just subpar gaming PC = $1000 sans the monitor, (Cheap 19 Inch Monitor = $150, Cheap 19 Inch TV = $100)

Paragraph five continous the drivel as he exlaims, �I can't tell you how much headache I've had trying to get a game that I bought to run properly on many of my PC's both previous and current. There was always some glitch, or point where the game would freeze and I would have to either Ctrl+Alt+Del out of it, or press the power button. This is exaggeration in its purest form and the writer has now lost all credibility. (How so? The title was called "Ripper," I never found a single computer that cheezy game would work in, I kind of liked it cause it was pretty violent and dark, but I could only get through about 10 minutes and it would crash. There were others as well, like this game Dune, that I got, it won't run in any of my notebooks, my Pentium III and my Pentium 4 with a Radeon 9700 Pro, it boots fine, but the colors is misadjusted and there is little explanation or documentation on fixing it. )

Paragraph six: The Keyboard and Mouse. If the keyboard and mouse is such a cumbersome control device, why are console manufacturers seriously considering the keyboard and mouse? The writer states, �Yeah having 103 buttons is swell, but is it really necessary? Playing video games in this fashion is cumbersome.� Has anyone here ever used 103 buttons to play a game? This is once again complete nonsense. The keyboard and mouse allows more in depth gaming, and you can always utilize a gamepad on the PC if you desire. Also a joystick or steering wheel, etc.
(I've been playing Return to Castle Wolfenstein, and I HATE using the keyboard and mouse, the mouse movement is smooth and precise, but walking with the up, down, right, left keys pisses me off, and then there's all the keys you have to remember that do this and that, although this kind of gameplay is at the core of PC games, it's inherantly cumbersome)

In this excerpt, Mind you the resolution is not nearly as high as a PC on a console, but for obvious reasons a TV is not designed to duplicate such high resolutions except in the case of 1080i Digital Television, and as it is, the newest consoles support HDTV. I can get all that for $149.99 - $199.99 in an X-Box,, a GameCube, or a PS2. What a deal!�. Here the writer shows how dim-witted he really is. I have but one question for the writer: �How much did that HDTV cost? The answer: $1600.00 at least. You can�t get all of that in an Xbox, or Gamecube, or PS2 for $149.00-$199.00, you have to purchase a specific TV to get that, and the price for admission is very high. Furthermore, the resolutioin still isn�t as high as a PC. (The thing of it is, you don't need 1600x1200 SXGA Resolution to have a game look good on TV. Many of the graphically intensive games on the X-Box and PS2 look stunning on a regular 3:4 TV, and if you're lucky enough to have HDTV then there are added benefits for those gamers, and higher resolutions.)

In the second to last paragraph, the writer explains his opinion on his favorite position for gaming, �I love being able to�lay comfortably on my couch with a controller in hand�. Good for you bud. I love to get into my games. I prefer to have the monitor 50mm from my face as I sneak around in Thief, or the upcoming Splinter Cell. I say to the writer, �go grab a bag of chips and lay on your couch�, I want to game, not be breast fed entertainment. You've failed to explain how playing games on a PC or a console differ by such a vast degree to warrant branding consoles as, "breast fed entertainment" Simpicity? I have two CD players in my computer (actually one is a DVD player), I can switch between two different games without getting out of my seat. How�s that for convenience? (I don't get your point in that sentance.)

Gaming on the PC is fun, (Yes it can be.)it is better (Not exactly.), more versatile, more engrossing, and yes it is more expensive. But most importantly it is more fun. Also the PC is far more versatile than any console and it is a much better choice for gaming for me. (The key words in that sentance is, "for you" it may not be for everyone.) Many patches expand gameplay, not necessarily fix bugs. Also there is the ability of mods, expansioins, etc. These are all major pluses. So I have one question for the writer: �Do you enjoy running over to your PC to post about your favorite console game�? I can do that much faster from my PC! And there are no console barriers. PC games play on PC�s, (Not entirely true, a lot of PC games are ported over to console now.)but many console games are exclusive. (Yes, many console games are exclusive because they reach a wider established audience). Bummer. Viva la PC!!

I'm not entirely sure why this guy chose to be so abbrasive about his argument on console gaming vs. PC gaming, but his tone warranted adequate response by me. Yes, PC gaming is great for people who can afford it and like the type of games that PC game developers continue to produce. Right now computers excel in the gaming genres of: First Person Shooter, Strategy, Massively Multiplayer Online RPG, and Online Multiplayer. If you are a hardcore fan of these types of games, then a PC is perfect for you. PC does pretty good in the RPG genre, but most PC RPG's lack a lot of depth in terms of an epic storyline and sweeping musical score. Other than those the console wins hands down in the genre's of Fighting, Offline Adventure-RPG, Offline Traditional Linear RPG, Platformer, Adventure-Platformer, Sci-Fi RPG, Action-RPG, Full Action, Driving Simulation, Sports, Survival Horror, Xtreme Sports, etc. It really doesn't matter what platform you have, what truly matters is the quality of the games you play on that platform. Of all the hundreds of games I've played throughout my lifetime, a vast majority of my all time favorite and most remembered games appeared on various console systems that have been released. There may come a point where the variances between the platforms are invisible, as it is now, games like HALO show how much a console can do what a PC can, and there are a handful of RPG's coming to PC that will actually have very thought-provoking storylines from what I have been told.

"Bigdaddy" Explains: I must say the console - PC debate as featured on your site was extremely interesting. As a hardcore gamer, with my roots in the old Atari days, I think I know a good game ( as well as a games platform ) when I see one.

Atlthough my current hardware of choice is a PS2, I happen to like all the consoles, and I also own a fairly high - end PC. Anyway, my biggest gripe with the PC is just how tempremental the damn thing is. You were 100% correct when you stated that continual downloading of patches, 4 in 1 drivers, Nvidia drivers etc. is needed to keep things running somewhat smoothly. I have experienced crash upon crash, hardware clashes, IRQ conflicts, system fan failure, the works. All this despite the fact that I swoon over my PC like it's some rare, expensive treasure. Not too long ago, I purchased a Creative Inspire 5700 speaker system which cost a fortune and gave me the biggest headache. I somehow aquired conflicts galore, my mobo whacked out, games failed to run properly - I could go on and on. For weeks this went on until I finally solved the problem, by installing the latest Via drivers. Easy to fix, but I KNOW that on a console this would never have happened. In fact, I plan on using these same speakers for my PS2 (hell, the colour even matches!) and screw the PC. My ti 4200 also displays colours incorrectly now and then and for some reason UT (the original) has awful polygon tearing since I installed the card. Despite having great FPS and RTS games, the PC is far too limited. No fighting games, crap racing games, ported extreme sports games, mediocre survival horror, cookie-cutter RPG's...you get the point. Besides, good PC games are invariably ported to the consoles anyway, so what console players DO miss is irrelevant.

To me, PC gaming is not at all cost-effective, considering the limited genres. It's all about framerate and bragging rights. Geez, 300 fps for Quake 3? Awesome - even though it looks exactly the same at 60 fps, so the extra cash spent to get the additional 240 fps was hardly worth it, except to brag to your mates. On a console, there are no such worries. THPS4 looks good, no matter what the framerate, no matter what the resolution, in fact, no matter what the system. Yes, the PC does have superior visuals, but again, at what cost? Besides, the sound capabilities on a PC, IMO, lag far behind that of a console. EAX is regarded as a "feature" in PC gaming, yet on a console it's taken for granted. The PS2 had Dolby digital and DTS built into the system. How much money is needed to get the equivalent on a PC? Hint: a lot.

Since switching back to consoles, I have been enjoying my gaming again. No hassles, no worries, no glitches. Just pure plug and play, the way it's meant to be.

This doesn't mean that PC gaming is poor, and I have played some great games on the system, but anytime you have to develop a game on a "moving target" like a PC there are bound to be hardware problems. It's these problems, that I, as well as friends of mine, have experienced ever since we have owned PC's. It's also these problems that have convinced me, for once and for all, that the PC is meant to be a workstation and a console is for games. With consoles evolving at a rapid rate, what with all their power and online connectivety, the previous advantages as enjoyed by the PC are fast becoming a thing of the past. No doubt the PC will exist for a very long time to come as a games platform, but it will increasingly become more of a "niche" machine, far more than it is today. Hey, if folk want to spend a lot a cash on a huge, bulky, unreliable machine that is limited to FPS's, RTS's, the odd flight sim and such, marvel at their framerates and benchmarks (whatever happened to the gameplay in the meantime?) then fine by me. I'll just pop GT3 into my console and have a blast.

MRM Writes: I saw your rant on your site. (okay) Then, I saw some guy's rant in reply to your rant. Then, a 3rd rant from another guy. Now, you were cutting and slamming on the first dude, because he 'stuck up' for pc gaming. (Well, I was actually providing adequate response to the things he was saying and the way he made it seem like I was some PC novice, and didn't have a clue about what I was saying, when in fact I have been using computers since the late 1980's. ) The other guy was all for consoles, and you didn't critique his opinion not once. (What he said was mostly accurate, and more reflective of his own experiences and sounded about on par with both the experiences of myself and other people I've spoken with, so really I didn't need to discuss anything with that person) Thus, biased. (Heh, I like the PC, and use it for PC functions, I have a Radeon 9700 Graphics Card, play a few games now and then, but have had so many headaches trying to operate or even install PC games in the past, I can't with good conscious say that the PC gaming experience is the easiest one to enjoy.)

How about me and you, settle the pc vs console debate? ( I don't think it can ever be "settled" bub.) I can easily settle this (laugh). ( Is that so... How are you going to say anything different that what has already been brought up here and already discussed without repeating what's already been said. )By the way, kid, if you think a fucked up Falcon Northwest of Alienware pc is a 'hard core' power rig for pc gamers? You're an idiot - completely. (At the time of writing the original article, Falcon Northwest and Alienware were offering things that were not offered by Dell, Gateway, Compaq-HP, IBM, MicronPC, or others, however those companies have started to jump on the bandwagon considering high-end gaming PC's are the most profitable for them and carry the highest margins in the desktop market) I wouldn't GIVE a Falcon NOR an Alienware pc to someone for FREE! Now, when you can actually conjure up more than 10th grade bashes about the pc, and obtain actual facts, we'll debate. (I don't see anything to indicate my original article or the rebuttal to the first reply lack actual facts, so what you are trying to inflame has no merit to it whatsoever. I wish I was in 10th grade again, the girls were better looking.) Keep in mind, that ALL CONSOLE GAMES are made via a PC. (Wow, now there's an amazing revelation, you've told me something I never knew before - /sarcasm. In the words of Jeff Foxworthy, "here's your sign.") If PC games are buggy, does this NOT imply console games ARE pc games, and are buggy, too? (I've never once had a console game that caused the unit to lock up, or required that I call the company for tech support, upgrade the unit's graphics processor, or add additional RAM to the console, or download a patch after it was made because the initial production run was faulty and didn't work with the console unit's OS, or required me to program the buttons on my control before I could play it, so ah, no, console games are not buggy. However, just so you know there are ways to cause glitches just for the fun of it with enhancers like GameShark. ) First lesson in debating: re-read what you write, because you can catch your own mistakes and prevent yourself from stick your own foot, in your own ass ;) (I don't see any mistakes in anything I've written so far and it all appears to be right on the money in terms of describing both the advantages and disadvantages of the PC, PC games, a console, and console games. So, basically you're just trying to rouse argument for the sake of creating argument. )

Let the debate begin! (Sure, if you want to make yourself look like a fool... Go ahead and piss up that rope and beat more dead horses that have already been discussed in the main article or as rebuttals to the first reply. )Or whatever. I'm going to go have dinner, you can go play Resident Evil at 640x480 resolution on a Playstation ;) (I haven't played RE for PS1 since 1997, but I will go play Soul Calibur II for GameCube, HALO for my X-Box, and Final Fantasy X for my Playstation 2, thanks.)

Gregory Wrote: Most computers you find are the typical 'white elephant'. Those are mainly used for writing documents or building a design for oil rigs. When you step out of this view, which is what most console gamers accosiate with, and enter the true realm of PC gaming. It's a completely new game. The GPC (Gaming Personal Computer) is usually a lovely piece of hardware. Resolution on a good moniter is outstanding, I was pretty pissed when Blackisle made Icewind Dale II non-resolution-friendly program, I could see my wizards head in 9 blocks. Speed and Graphics are superior. Take a look at, oh say, Half-Life 2. No console on todays market can rival the power required for those screen-shots, except maybe the computer. The moniters can be rammed up big-time. I heard of people actually plugging in T.V. screens 32 inch onto thier dream machines. Problem is that those are quite clunky, and lower resolution over larger screen isn't very efficient.

Control, yes, 103 keys may be hard to use for the average console gamer. But then again, I'm a pro at using PC's, and when I tryed playing Soul Calibur 2 at a friends house, I was a fish out of water. I couldn't co-ordinate the damnnable 'A' button. But then again, someone can just go to the store and buy a decent controler that replicates those of the consoles.

A good GPC is born with Multi-player compatibility. Battle.net, Gamespy, and MMORPG's, they are all possible with GPC's. Now onto consoles. They are cheaper by far in terms of the actual hardware. Add in similiar sound and video output and a PC gamer can be satisfyed . But a such devices fall into the range smiliar to GPC's. One can simply pop-in the disk and play the game, no need to install the game, no need to upgrade drivers, add-in the peripherals, or do anything else, but often times those are one-shot deals, and only need to be upgraded every month or so, you can do it while at work. But then again... if you leave a Plasma or LCD moniter on for too long, showing the same image, you can create 'screen burn', where the image is 'burned' onto the screen.(Actually, burn in only occurs on Rear Projection Televisions. LCD and Plasma Screens use an illuminated active matrix of dots so that doesn't happen, as well the burn in issue has been resolved in most projection big screen sets. Even in the case of burn in it would take a couple days of leaving the game on pause for this effect to occur) Controls, again, a consoel gamer on PC is a fish out of water, and vise-versa. Nothing can beat having to friends sit on a sofa shooting away at Halo. In those situations, you can really have fun with your buddy. Something that is very difficult, most-times immpossible, to do on the PC. That's why someone invented the LAN-party. Then again, those are EXTREMELY hard to set up, and thus, you can still resort to a friendly console. Consoles are now going online, yes they pay for it, but it's still online capability, and some games are damn good on X-Box live.

I have tryed being equal in both terms, I personnally prefer the PC, but how a person wants to play games is his/her buisness. The path of the PC grants raw power in its fullest, adaptability, and true online-capability. The path of the PC puts the burden on control, price, and constant needs for upgrades.

The path of the Console grants decent power, low-price, a young (but worthy) multi-player functions, and greater use when with friends. It takes away freedoms of adaptability, and it prohibits the use of utilising your hard-ware for other purposes other than gaming. PC's are far superior in terms of non-auto-aim FPS games, Strategy, and online. Consoles really offer somthing in racing and sports.

This is my view on the war between console and PC gaming, Take your pick...

[Added 3/1/05] Phillip Walker Says: I�ve had a pc ever since they came out. (Oh? You had an Apple Lisa and Apple I?) Also had an Atari 2600 and 5200. Even has Nes and genesis. I liked them and still think some of those games are hard. (Some of them are, those games required more skill and reflexes than many of today's games, but FPS still present a worthy challenge) I do all my gaming on a pc now. And it�s cost me about 1600 to get everything I want. (Still way more expensive than any console system) But I was think of buying an Xbox until I�ve played one. Have you ever played a game on the Xbox and it gets a little sluggish. (Every game, except for a game that was ported from the PC, Morrowind, work fine on the Xbox for me, never had any slowdown except for Morrowind) That�s maybe because you are lucky to get 60fps on a console. The games are very simple yes. (Very simple? I beg to differ. I've played games on consoles that are far more complex than PC games) But for true gamers and not kids they get a pc. (What world do you live in man? Every single one of my friends and just about everyone I know owns either a PS2 or an Xbox, and most of those people are over 20 years old! That's a just plain ignorant statement right there, sorry but I have to point it out.) Besides there are too many emulators that run Xbox or ps2 games on the pc with hardly and performance hits. (Emphasis mine. Grammar errors anyone?) I like pc gaming. (I can tell.) My computer plugs into my TV and I sit down with my control and play. Setting the buttons isn�t very hard. In fact most only have 8 buttons on a controller so you only have to set 8 up. Only takes a few seconds. (The last time I bought a joystick, I spent a couple hours trying to figure it out, and realized I had to program the buttons for every game.) As for having to download the latest drivers and patches. If you really knew about computers, even if you don�t play games you still have to do it. (So your argument here is that because you have to download patches and drivers anyway you might as well do it for video games too. That's a good thing?) I also do video editing on the pc. (Video editing has nothing to do with video gaming, it's just a function of a PC) No console can give you that. (You're right. Because no one wants to edit video when they would rather be playing games.) And I can even record my HDTV programs on the computers. Can you tell me which console can do that? (Yeah, a TiVo Box, but that's not even a game system.) If you�ve noticed the games for Xbox and ps2 they tend to be more geared for kids. (You're kidding right? *Pun intended* So I guess little kids play Counterstrike or Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, or Need for Speed Underground, or Fatal Frame, or Resident Evil 4, etc.. hmm...perhaps some do, but those games are geared toward older players) So if you have that mentality than go ahead. As for using the arrow buttons and true computer gamer will tell you they use two hands. (Breaking News Headline: Shocking revelation revealed! Computer gamers use TWO HANDS! /sarcasm) One on the mouse and the other over the arrows. Plus with a mouse�s middle button no need to push a button on the keyboard. And I don�t know of any game that uses 103 buttons. (Of course not, because you DON'T NEED 103 buttons to play) Consoles are great for the price. (Whew, he says something non opinionated for once) But there games aren�t cheap. (Hmm, you can buy a "Greatest Hits" or "Platinum Hits" title for 19.99 or on sale for 14.95 at a lot of places, and you can buy them used at GameStop for next to nothing) But with Sony and Microsoft coming out with new systems to give you more options. Why is this? To offer things a computer can do. (If you know anything about consoles they come out with a new generation of consoles about every 5 - 6 years, it's just a normal progression of techology to improve the quality of the game experience, better graphics, etc, you on the other hand as a hardcore PC gamer have to buy a new graphics board roughly every year) There is no console than can match speeds with a pc. (You are correct there...for now. The PS2 Cell Processor looks like its going to be far better than any PC on the market today. And X-Box 2 is looking like it's going to have multicore processors as well running at 64 bit, but I'm not sure if that's been finalized yet.) You said you played the same game on both a console and pc and didn�t notice much of a difference. You ever played halo on a console with about 20 enemies all on the screen. Slow down some. (Nope, I haven't had slowdown except on Network Play because of network Lag, and it was horrendously worse on Xboxconnect than X-Box Live) That�s where the 60fps come in. Even ati 9600 radeon offers 120 fps. For me pc gaming is great. I have a 57 TV I use to play my games, watch DVDs and even listen to music on. (Good for you, many people do the same.) But to each is there own. Consoles are great if you like kid games. (Sorry, that doesn't float bub.) But there is just so much more you can do with computer games. You can create your own maps and mods. As for bugs. That�s another debate. (Yeah, I explained in the original article which I wrote, damn, like over 2 years ago, that yes, this was the benefit of computers over console, that you could get upgrades, mods and maps and such, however now with X-Box Live you can do that as well) Yes computer tend to require you to update a lot. But what happens when your Xbox or ps2 video card craps out. (LOL! I've never had a console's graphics card quit, considering there isn't one, it's integrated into a custom motherboard that maximizes use of the GPU and CPU) Can you just go out and buy a new one. NO. (Sure if that happened you just buy another console for what...$150?) If you like console than whatever floats your boat. But I like the flexibility a computer gives me. (Agreed, that's true, there is flexability) Plus you forgot to mention that with a console you have to pay to play online. (Ah, yeah. And you have to pay to play for Dark Ages of Camelot, Everquest, Worlds of Warcraft, The Sims, Star Wars, etc.. There are a ton of pay for play PC games that cost between 9.95 and 14.95 a month to play! On X-Box live you pay 49.99 for a 1 YEAR subscription and can play any Live based game, hundreds of titles) Where as most pc offer free online play. (A few do yes, Warcraft III for example) Yes dos games ran fine but then again dos sucked. As for crashes I really haven�t had many. (lucky you.) And I�ve been using a computer for games for over 14 years now. (Referring back to the first sentance of this whole deal - Since they first came out in what, 1991? lol) One of my favorites is and will always be wing commander. (Yeah, that was a good one, played it myself back in the day.) Consoles are easy to use I agree. But ever wonder why the manufactures are trying to make them more like a personal computer. At the time they were the bomb. But now a cheap computer just blows them away. (Not really, you can't play the latest and greatest PC games very well on cheap computer without buying a new graphics card) So if they were so good than why are there so many more computer games. (You really don't get out of the house to a local GameStop, EBGames do you? Seriously though, there are thousands of titles for consoles) Plus more people have a pc than any console systems. (Yes, this is true. However, how many of the people who use computers are using them to play games? A small fraction, considering there are millions upon millions of computers being used in offices, schools, governments, etc.) So not to bash consoles to bad they are great for the price. If you don�t mind playing simple games. But with the way computers are getting faster and more powerful it�s no wonder why Sony is building a ps3. To keep up.