I've just installed Devil May Cry 4...

[dirtydog]

...and it took literally over half an hour to install :shocked: Easily the longest install of any game I've ever owned.

I wonder if it's time to upgrade my DVD drive? ;D

Can anyone beat that time for a lengthy game installation?!

[Haly]

When I installed Age of Conan on my laptop, it took just under an hour and a half. Then I had to download the 600mb odd patch.

[Justsomebloke]

FSX took an age to instal but I can't remember how long, Worst thing about instals is leaving them to it & then coming back to find you have to Click on Yes to Proceed AGAIN :angry: & You're only 3 mins into the instal :'(

[dirtydog]

When I installed Age of Conan on my laptop, it took just under an hour and a half. Then I had to download the 600mb odd patch.

:shocked: okay you've made me feel better that half an hour isn't too excessive!

I think my DVD drive reads at 8x speed.

At least you've only gotta do it once :)

[Haly]

Not sure what mine reads at, laptop's less than a year old though so shouldn't be too slow in theory.....in the end I left it on while I went out as at least it was a fairly simple install :D Just a matter of waiting ages.

[Belmit]

It's been so long since I installed a computer game I'd forgotten you had to install them! I used to be a die-hard PC gamer - I had consoles but in the main I played PC games, mainly FPSs, which consoles couldn't touch. Kingpin, RtCW, NOLF, Max Payne, Serious Sam, Half-Life, Delta Force, Medal of Honour, CS, etc. Then I got FEAR, and it played like a dog, even though I had pretty decent equipment. A few months later and I got a 360, and the only game I've bought for the PC since then is STALKER, which I'd had on pre-order for 3 freakin' years. Consoles have become so much better at FPSs since then, and due to everything coming out on all formats I can't see me getting another PC game again. The idea of installing a game seems really odd after three years of not having to do it.

[dirtydog]

I gather you have to install games on the PS3 don't you? ;) So it isn't just a PC thing.

I think PCs are inherently far superior for FPS games as well, due to the control (mouse and keyboard). Although DMC is a third person, gamepad game of course.

[Davey_Pitch]

Devil May Cry? Install? You mean you're not playing it on a console as you should? :p

[leowyatt]

haha funny you should say that Davey, Rob mentioned this morning on the way into work that he'd installed it last night.

[dirtydog]

It's a 'Games for Windows' game so it's just like the 360 version in all respects, including 360 controller support, apart from more detailed graphics and higher resolutions ;)

[NokkonWud]

Devil May Cry? Install? You mean you're not playing it on a console as you should? :p

He's from the stone age. Leave him alone.

[dirtydog]

He's from the stone age. Leave him alone.

Is the PS3 from the stone age then? ;) And I think my PC is superior to any console.

[NokkonWud]

As long as you think it is that's all that matters :P. Not all PS3 games install either.

[Streeteh]

Longest install i've had was Gears of War on the PC, nearly an hour.

[dirtydog]

As long as you think it is that's all that matters :P. Not all PS3 games install either.

Do you doubt my claims? ;D

[Davey_Pitch]

And I think my PC is superior to any console.

From a technical/power point of view, probably. From a gaming point of view? Not a chance IMO, not for me anyway. Consoles just offer me personally so much more than a PC does, quite comfortably.

[dirtydog]

What does a console offer that a PC doesn't, console exclusive games excepted?

A PC can run games as well or better than a console in terms of performance, and also some games, particularly FPS games are more playable on a PC due to mouse support.

[NokkonWud]

But certainly less interactive. The all in one LIVE online and how it's embedded into the dashboard on 360 destroys anything the PC has offered thus far. Jack of all trades, master of most describes the 360.

[Desmo]

30mins to install a game? I though it was bad when I'd start loading Commando on my Amstrad CPC464, walk down the shop for some sweets and come back 10-15 minutes later just to see it finish loading ;D

[Streeteh]

What does a console offer that a PC doesn't, console exclusive games excepted?


It's not exactly fair to compare each system as a gaming platform but then say that the games for each platform must be excluded from the discussion surely? :p

Best part of consoles are the huge number of utterly fantastic games that the PC doesn't offer. Metal Gear Solid 4, The Darkness, Uncharted and (so far) little big planet are the best games i've played this year, all of which aren't available on the PC. The only PC exclusive game that i can think of that has been half decent this year is Crysis: Warhead, but even that doesn't compare to the aforementioned best games.

Yeah, the PC is more powerful and produces better graphics, there's no debating that. But i'm more fussed about the actual games themselves and for that consoles win hands down. I'd rather have hundreds of hours of fun with some slight aliasing and lower res textures than dozens of hours of fun in super-slick, HDRd goodness. Luckily i get to experience the best of both worlds though :D.

Sorry, totally off topic.

[loki]

But certainly less interactive. The all in one LIVE online and how it's embedded into the dashboard on 360 destroys anything the PC has offered thus far. Jack of all trades, master of most describes the 360.

As does the PC just as well. In fact more so at times on the PC. Don't get me wrong I am still warming up to the idea of gaming on console and would consider myself a multi platform gamer nowadays. That said, with the ease of Steam and a pretty decent voice client it actually can be as good if not better.

If I fancy a games night with my buds then we can all sit there talking about what we want on vent. Sometimes 5 sometimes 10 sometimes 20 of us. We all don't have to be playing games either to enjoy the social aspect of it. Then when you add Steam into the equation, we can all switch from Call of Duty 4 (Better on the PC multiplayer than console - FACT !!!) to Company of Heroes to Grid etc etc etc. The only thing that is missing is the achievements that XBL offers. But as were not achievement whores it's a moot point anyway. Better yet we don't even have to change a CD/DVD in the process. So to suggest that XBL destroys anything that the PC has to offer isn't necessarily correct.

Personally I have tried shooters on the PS1, PS2 & now the PS3 as well Xbox and I must say it's a more enjoyable experience for me at least on PC by any shadow of a doubt

[NokkonWud]

Steam is very poor compared to Live and just better than PSN. On PC it's a lot of seperate clients with more seperate servers. Live does it all centrally, brilliantly. I am typing this on my PS3 as my PSU blew and it takes ages with a pad.

[dirtydog]

30mins to install a game? I though it was bad when I'd start loading Commando on my Amstrad CPC464, walk down the shop for some sweets and come back 10-15 minutes later just to see it finish loading ;D

Yeah I remember the loading times on my Commodore 64 as well. I forget how spoiled we are these days with games loading off fast hard drives in seconds!

[dirtydog]

It's not exactly fair to compare each system as a gaming platform but then say that the games for each platform must be excluded from the discussion surely? :p

Best part of consoles are the huge number of utterly fantastic games that the PC doesn't offer. Metal Gear Solid 4, The Darkness, Uncharted and (so far) little big planet are the best games i've played this year, all of which aren't available on the PC. The only PC exclusive game that i can think of that has been half decent this year is Crysis: Warhead, but even that doesn't compare to the aforementioned best games.

Yeah, the PC is more powerful and produces better graphics, there's no debating that. But i'm more fussed about the actual games themselves and for that consoles win hands down. I'd rather have hundreds of hours of fun with some slight aliasing and lower res textures than dozens of hours of fun in super-slick, HDRd goodness. Luckily i get to experience the best of both worlds though :D.

Sorry, totally off topic.

Well this particular game is cross platform ;)

Some cross platform games are far superior on the PC. I think of some of the cross platform driving games which are 30fps on consoles but you can run them at twice that on the PC. Also GTA IV for example, won't be 30fps on the PC and will have sharper graphics, less pop in, etc. As well as better controls.

[loki]

Steam is very poor compared to Live and just better than PSN. On PC it's a lot of seperate clients with more seperate servers. Live does it all centrally, brilliantly. I am typing this on my PS3 as my PSU blew and it takes ages with a pad.

That is a bit misleading though and i'm not sure that Steam is as poor as you suggest. At worst you run a game through Steam and a separate voice client so that's two app's. Valve based games have in built voice servers as do a lot of games nowadays that aren't on the Steam Platform. I stand by my point as well about Ventrilo or TeamSpeak 2. If I wan't to sit there just browsing the net or have a chat with my mates whilst I play one game and they play another I can do effortlessly. Does XBL offer the functionality of just chat (Genuine Question as I am not 100% sure). You can match make and you can set recurring events.

The other issue is that of servers. If I am not mistaken does XBL not run on a P2P service whilst PC Gaming, more often than not, is Direct Connect. In theory latency issues should be less of a problem on Direct connection rather than P2P. The exception being Left4Dead which Microsoft have committed dedicated servers to. Moreover when playing on Multiplayer FPS I like the idea off playing in servers with 16+ maybe 40-50 players at a time.

I will be in the fortunate position of having a High Spec PC, Xbox360 & PS3 by the end of next week. Gaming Nirvana. But let's not get too dismisive of PC Gaming or on the contrary platforms such as XBL or PSN being the panacea for Gaming Heaven. It goes without saying that XBL has taken gaming to a new level but it's very much a spoon fed experience. Each platform has it's own plus and minus points but I don't think its fair to suggest that PC Gaming is the poorer relation.

Apologies to DD for dragging off topic. I played DMC4 on PC and it was a pretty good experience. Graphic wise it was fantastic. Gameplay wise it was good with a controller. It was a pretty linear experience. Nice to dip your toe in and out of.

[dirtydog]

I don't mind the thread going off topic, it ended up more interesting than a discussion of game install times anyway. Yeah DMC4 is the first DMC game I've played, I bought it on the strength of the impressive demo. I know the actual gameplay is rather simplistic and completely linear but I don't mind that for this sort of game, and the graphics are a visual treat for sure. It is a great port and runs very well even on modest hardware (before I recently upgraded my PC, the demo ran superbly on a P4 3.0 and 7600GT, a system which struggled with most other recent game releases).

[Desmo]

Guys, guys, guys...you'll never convince the other that your chosen platform is the best :)

It's all down to personal opinion and what factors each user puts top of their list. For me, the fixed cost and ease of use of console gaming makes it top for me. The console cost is fixed and I know I don't have to upgrade it to play the latest games. It's easy because I buy a game, pop the disc in and it plays. As a fairly casual gamer, these are my priorities. But I'd certainly not try and convince anyone that it's better than a PC for gaming.

[Davey_Pitch]

What does a console offer that a PC doesn't, console exclusive games excepted?

Ease of use for one. I don't have to worry about making sure my hardware is up to spec, or my drivers up to date. I don't need to worry about whether I need to tweak settings to get a game to run at a certain res. I just pop the game in, sit on my comfy couch, and enjoy HD gaming on my 42" TV.

A PC can run games as well or better than a console in terms of performance

Again, perhaps, if you have a good spec PC. Not everyone can afford to spend lots of money to keep their hardware up to date, but more people can afford to drop £150 on an Xbox 360.

and also some games, particularly FPS games are more playable on a PC due to mouse support.

That's also a matter of opinion. I like FPS games on a console, especially when playing on Live. I know that when I'm getting killed (quite often really :p), I'm doing so because the other guy is better. I'm not worrying about whether his mouse or keyboard are better than mine, and more suited to gaming. On consoles you're on a level playing field for nearly every game (driving games excepted, where some people have wheels).

If I fancy a games night with my buds then we can all sit there talking about what we want on vent. Sometimes 5 sometimes 10 sometimes 20 of us. We all don't have to be playing games either to enjoy the social aspect of it.

The new Xbox Experience (due in 12 days) will add this into the Xbox as well, with the Party system. You can all be in different games chatting away, then move through loads of games, always keeping your party together. Nice and easy.

Then when you add Steam into the equation, we can all switch from Call of Duty 4 (Better on the PC multiplayer than console - FACT !!!)

In an argument about opinion I can't believe someone has the gall to use the word "fact" :p The only real difference between the 2 that I'm aware of is that you can have more players in the PC multiplayer. If you prefer that, then good for you, but don't say that it's factually better for that reason. Not everyone likes huge multiplayer games, me being one of them.


Some cross platform games are far superior on the PC. I think of some of the cross platform driving games which are 30fps on consoles but you can run them at twice that on the PC. Also GTA IV for example, won't be 30fps on the PC and will have sharper graphics, less pop in, etc. As well as better controls.

How did I know you'd throw 30FPS in there somewhere? :p I would have thought that the amount of times you've had that thrown back at you on OcUK would be proof enough that most people don't give a toss about it.

Anyway, as Desmo said, all of this is simply a matter of opinion. I personally prefer my consoles for gaming. Does that mean I think the PC is a bad gaming platform? Of course not, it still does some games far better (strategy games and RTS are still better on a PC IMO). However, my personal preference is consoles, and nothing anyone says is going to make me think otherwise. :)

[Streeteh]

Well this particular game is cross platform ;)

Some cross platform games are far superior on the PC. I think of some of the cross platform driving games which are 30fps on consoles but you can run them at twice that on the PC. Also GTA IV for example, won't be 30fps on the PC and will have sharper graphics, less pop in, etc. As well as better controls.

Oh i don't disagree, as i say, the PC is clearly a superior platform in terms of technical prowess. It's just that all of the best games of the year imo were console releases, if i stuck purely to the PC i would have missed out on them. That is enough for me to demote PC from the place it used to own as best gaming platform. For me the days of such epic games as TFC are gone, but not forgotten.

I do really wish developers would allow Mouse + KB support in FPS' on the PS3 though, that is the only thing i really miss.

[dirtydog]

How did I know you'd throw 30FPS in there somewhere? :p I would have thought that the amount of times you've had that thrown back at you on OcUK would be proof enough that most people don't give a toss about it.

I think PC gamers care about framerate, and prefer games to run well above 30fps. Although you don't care about framerate, I'm betting you would enjoy playing some of your 30fps games at 60fps. You would see and feel the difference and you'd like it IMO.

But yeah let's not turn this into another dreaded 30fps debate ;D

[loki]

Ease of use for one. I don't have to worry about making sure my hardware is up to spec, or my drivers up to date. I don't need to worry about whether I need to tweak settings to get a game to run at a certain res. I just pop the game in, sit on my comfy couch, and enjoy HD gaming on my 42" TV.


Again not entirely true. Whilst the cost of consoles (Xbox360) has come down considerably you still need an investment of at least £300.00 for a half decent size LCD to go with it. The cost of entry for PC gaming is also at an all time low. Contrary to popular misinformation, you don't actually need to upgrade every single time nor do you need to upgrade every single component to enjoy a high quality gaming experience. My wifes uncle has been playing COD 4 quite merrily on his AthlonXP 3700 with an 9800GT. Graphic wise it will stand upto the visuals of the X360. It's only the very high(over) speced games such as Crysis that claim to need some uber system to play it on and even then thats more for the fan boys.

As I said previously, i'm not overly fussed as I should have all 3 platforms by next week. It's all about the personal experience that makes it fun. Is XBL & PSN Good - Damn straight it is. Is the PC as bad as it's made out to be, Absolutley not.

[dirtydog]

Also PC games are generally a fair bit cheaper than console games. £18-£25 for the new releases versus what, £35-£40 for console games.

[Davey_Pitch]

I think PC gamers care about framerate, and prefer games to run well above 30fps. Although you don't care about framerate, I'm betting you would enjoy playing some of your 30fps games at 60fps. You would see and feel the difference and you'd like it IMO.

But yeah let's not turn this into another dreaded 30fps debate ;D

Oh, I'm not saying there's not a difference, but we've both seen that a lot of people don't place a lot of importance on it. For me, it's always been about the gameplay. I'd rather have a 30FPS game that played beautifully than a 60FPS that is rather average. If they can manage both, great, but if not then no big deal for me.

Again not entirely true. Whilst the cost of consoles (Xbox360) has come down considerably you still need an investment of at least £300.00 for a half decent size LCD to go with it.

That's true, but I'd hazard a guess that a lot of people already have a decent LCD now, considering how cheap they are. Saying that though, I used to play the 360 on a 21" standard TV, and while there is a noticeable difference in graphical quality, it doesn't affect the quality of the gameplay at all. I guess the same could be said though for playing PC games at low-medium settings.

Is XBL & PSN Good - Damn straight it is. Is the PC as bad as it's made out to be, Absolutley not.

I don't think anyone is saying the PC is bad (I'm certainly not anyway), I just think more and more people are shifting to consoles now as gaming platform of choice.

Also PC games are generally a fair bit cheaper than console games. £18-£25 for the new releases versus what, £35-£40 for console games.

That's true, but thanks to supermarkets many new games are being released at £30 on consoles, which is much better. There's also a booming 2nd hand market for those happy to wait a couple of weeks, games become so much cheaper. I do concede that PC games are cheaper though.

[NokkonWud]

Yeah I remember the loading times on my Commodore 64 as well. I forget how spoiled we are these days with games loading off fast hard drives in seconds!

I remember my neighbour had a Spectrum and she would start loading a game, play for an hour, then come back to a loaded game and more often than not think 'meh' and not play it. These days 10 seconds irks the hell out of me.

[NokkonWud]

As well as better controls.

That would be a first for a GTA game on PC!

[dirtydog]

That would be a first for a GTA game on PC!

:shocked: debatable! GTA 3, Vice City and San Andreas are all vastly better on the PC in my not so humble opinion!

[Haly]

C64 loading times were absolutely ridiculous ;D
Can't believe I could put up with it patiently at the age of 6, yet get annoyed by a few seconds in a 360 game now. I swear my patience is going in reverse the older I get ;D

[dirtydog]

Not only do games load in a flash nowadays compared to then, the quality of games in terms of gameplay, graphics and sound is orders of magnitude better than we would have dreamed possible in those days. It is easy to forget that when we, and I am no different, complain about relatively insignificant issues in today's games! :)

[divine]

It's only the very high(over) speced games such as Crysis that claim to need some uber system to play it on and even then thats more for the fan boys.

I remember saying very very shortly after its release on OcUK that Crysis was a poorly optimised engine and I got absolutely shot down in flames by pretty much every single poster there bar maybe dirtydog I think it was.

Look back now and what do you see? Most of the forum slagging Crysis for having an appalling engine :confused:

Like I was saying in another thread, i'm not really convinced PC gaming is especially more expensive than console gaming because, yes whilst a good gaming PC is £500-£600 now, you'd be spending £400 on a normal PC anyway, so arguably the 'gaming' additions to the spec are only costing you £200. Much the same as arguing a TV is a cost of console, most people will have one anyway, so it isn't strictly fair to lump it in with the cost of the console.

[loki]

I remember saying very very shortly after its release on OcUK that Crysis was a poorly optimised engine and I got absolutely shot down in flames by pretty much every single poster there bar maybe dirtydog I think it was.

Look back now and what do you see? Most of the forum slagging Crysis for having an appalling engine :confused:

Like I was saying in another thread, i'm not really convinced PC gaming is especially more expensive than console gaming because, yes whilst a good gaming PC is £500-£600 now, you'd be spending £400 on a normal PC anyway, so arguably the 'gaming' additions to the spec are only costing you £200. Much the same as arguing a TV is a cost of console, most people will have one anyway, so it isn't strictly fair to lump it in with the cost of the console.


Very true.

I think the thing that annoys cross platoform gamers is when you are told PC gaming is more expensive. In reallity the cost is probably very simillar. If you were entirely new to gaming and had £600.00 to burn you could either get a console and TV or a PC and Monitor. The entry costs are simmilar. What distorts it is when your traditional console gamer says you need £x ammount of money to run a game when in reality it's only a few of the latest games that might need a bump on the RAM side or a slightly faster CPU.

Horses for courses and I will be plugging in my new X360 tonight to see how it stacks up agains the PS3.

Better get your practice in Nokkon at FIFA '09 as i'm coming after ya:p