DarthHelmet86 wrote:

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

If I had to pick one system? My PS1. Nothing beats the feel of that controller.

Best controller ever and the time of the PS was the only time I was mainly a console player. I got a little USB converter for one when I did get a new PC.

I wouldn't have chosen based on any hardware though; I would go for the machine that I could get the best software for. That, in my case, is the PC. Many of my favourite games are not available on other machines or are not as good an experience.

I would actually pick the PS1 for one reason only. Blazing Dragons the worlds best adventure game to never be on PC.

If I was going to pick a PC it wouldn't be my new one. I can get DOS games working but Win95/98 is hard as balls to work. So I would pick a state of the art Win98 machine that could also easily run DOS games. Which in itself is a bit of wishful thinking.

Ah but you could emulate the Playstation on a PC and have the best of both worlds.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

aban57 wrote:

Humm... Try to run today's games with a 6 y/o PC The principle is the same. But yeah, If you want to have both, you'll have to maintain both too.

With the exception of most games released this year, I was still able to play the likes of Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 on my 5+ years old PC.
More-over I can still play 6 y/o games on my present PC. Heck I can play games over 15 years old, like AOE2 on my current PC.
I cannot, however play PS1 games on the PS3, let alone the PS4, nor can I play PS2 games on my PS1.

The PS3 is 100 percent PS1 backwards compatible. Early PS3s, the ones with 8 usbs on the front, are PS2 backwards compatible.

My bad, I meant PS2 to PS1. Good to hear they changed that with the PS3. But apparently the PS3 are largely not compatible with the PS2. And the PS4 has no direct backwards compatibility either.

The PS2 can play pretty much all PS1 games. Most PS3s can not play PS2 you are right, only very early ones which can be spotted by the usb ports and a few other things. The PS4 is getting a form of PS2 backwards compatibility but that is by devs porting/emulating their PS2 games for it. They get upped resolutions and some other things and cost about 20 usd I think. The Xbone has 360 backwards compatibility now but it is up to the publishers/devs of the games to patch their games to do that and it is taking a fair bit of time to happen.

Most consoles have not been backwards compatible. You can't get your SNES games running on your N64. Older PCs at the change from Win 98 to NT did have trouble with it as well. As did DOS games running on Win 98 cause DOS can be a picky beast. Its a very modern thing to my mind, I do understand older European consoles/pc things featured it to some extent.

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

Briton wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

If I had to pick one system? My PS1. Nothing beats the feel of that controller.

Best controller ever and the time of the PS was the only time I was mainly a console player. I got a little USB converter for one when I did get a new PC.

I wouldn't have chosen based on any hardware though; I would go for the machine that I could get the best software for. That, in my case, is the PC. Many of my favourite games are not available on other machines or are not as good an experience.

I would actually pick the PS1 for one reason only. Blazing Dragons the worlds best adventure game to never be on PC.

If I was going to pick a PC it wouldn't be my new one. I can get DOS games working but Win95/98 is hard as balls to work. So I would pick a state of the art Win98 machine that could also easily run DOS games. Which in itself is a bit of wishful thinking.

Ah but you could emulate the Playstation on a PC and have the best of both worlds.

When they get that emulation perfect I will be there. Problems with changing CDS, audio and graphics are still common in epsx and psx.

But it's still better than nothing

It is better than no PS1 for sure. It is pretty good in fact, better than the N64 emulator by far. But its not better than my chipped PS1. XD

DarthHelmet86 wrote:
I would actually pick the PS1 for one reason only. Blazing Dragons the worlds best adventure game to never be on PC.

If I was going to pick a PC it wouldn't be my new one. I can get DOS games working but Win95/98 is hard as balls to work. So I would pick a state of the art Win98 machine that could also easily run DOS games. Which in itself is a bit of wishful thinking.

Briton wrote:Ah but you could emulate the Playstation on a PC and have the best of both worlds.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:When they get that emulation perfect I will be there. Problems with changing CDS, audio and graphics are still common in epsx and psx.

I've never really got in to emulation. I did have a half-hearted attempt at emulating the Amiga 500 (which I loved) but I couldn't be arsed in the end.

Going back to that Skyrim Enhanced being released; I see it's free for PC users. Good news.

They are saying it will bring mod support to the PS4 as well so that makes it a lot more than just a graphical enhancement.

Free to PC users who own all the DLC or the GOTY I heard. I suspect it will bring mod support to the XBone as well. Fallout 4 has support on both and Xbone was the easier one to do it seems since it took longer for the PS4 to be allowed.

The only problem is using Beths rather laggy crap website.

Briton wrote:

Animavore wrote:

Briton wrote:

Animavore wrote:
It's not a strawman. I see it all the time in comment sections of video game articles. Games are dumbed down for 'casuals', meaning 'console players' (because PC players are all hardcore apparently).

It is a strawman when you use it in reply to what I've said.

Soz. Too used to dealing with the more negative end of the PC base I guess.

Actually if you are really a hardcore gamer I think you'd need to have a PC, PS4 and an Xbox One. I prefer the PC myself because many games I really like just aren't available on consoles and I like also like the flexibility of the games and modding. This is at last coming to consoles though, at least in some part.

Consoles are better for playing certain games though; I prefer sports action games and arcade racers on console for sure. The ones that confuse me are those like Mafia where part would be better on console and part on PC.

If you watched the recent Microsoft conference you'd have seen they're now merging Xbox and Windows 10 as a platform and you'll get all the exclusives on both.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Free to PC users who own all the DLC or the GOTY I heard.

Yes that's what I heard. Being late to the game I have the GotY version.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:
I suspect it will bring mod support to the XBone as well. Fallout 4 has support on both and Xbone was the easier one to do it seems since it took longer for the PS4 to be allowed.

The only problem is using Beths rather laggy crap website.

One downside is that SKSE (Skyrim Script Extender) is not going to be supported apparently. Not surprising I suppose but it means most of the best mods will need quite extensive work and many probably wont get done.

Which I am so happy for cause I want Dead Rising 4 on my PC so I can play with my mate. #FrankIsBack #FrancineIsBack

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Which I am so happy for cause I want Dead Rising 4 on my PC so I can play with my mate. #FrankIsBack #FrancineIsBack

Me too. I'm getting a PC later this year to play the type of games only PC has (and for all the other reasons one needs a PC for). I was expecting I'd get an X1 at the end of the cycle like I bought a 360 at the end of the cycle (then went back and played all the games I'd missed in a short space of time). Now I get the two in one with just the PC.

It does mean I am thinking about getting rid of my Xbone though. My PC can run all those games better so it is just if I want to keep it for the free games from live.

This is why we all really want VR.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
With the exception of most games released this year, I was still able to play the likes of Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 on my 5+ years old PC.
More-over I can still play 6 y/o games on my present PC. Heck I can play games over 15 years old, like AOE2 on my current PC.
I cannot, however play PS1 games on the PS3, let alone the PS4, nor can I play PS2 games on my PS1.

The PS3 is 100 percent PS1 backwards compatible. Early PS3s, the ones with 8 usbs on the front, are PS2 backwards compatible.

My bad, I meant PS2 to PS1. Good to hear they changed that with the PS3. But apparently the PS3 are largely not compatible with the PS2. And the PS4 has no direct backwards compatibility either.

The PS2 can play pretty much all PS1 games.

I stand corrected.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:Most PS3s can not play PS2 you are right, only very early ones which can be spotted by the usb ports and a few other things. The PS4 is getting a form of PS2 backwards compatibility but that is by devs porting/emulating their PS2 games for it. They get upped resolutions and some other things and cost about 20 usd I think. The Xbone has 360 backwards compatibility now but it is up to the publishers/devs of the games to patch their games to do that and it is taking a fair bit of time to happen.

Most consoles have not been backwards compatible. You can't get your SNES games running on your N64. Older PCs at the change from Win 98 to NT did have trouble with it as well. As did DOS games running on Win 98 cause DOS can be a picky beast. Its a very modern thing to my mind, I do understand older European consoles/pc things featured it to some extent.

Todat all post 98 windows systems can run DOS and older games though.
The same is not true for consoles with regards to their games or for older systems to play newer games.

They can with Dosbox or Scummvm they can not run them natively. And older Windows files will be hard to run or impossible if you are on a 64 bit OS. Sites like GoG go through a lot of hard work to get Windows games to run well.

DarthHelmet86 wrote:It does mean I am thinking about getting rid of my Xbone though. My PC can run all those games better so it is just if I want to keep it for the free games from live.

Good point. Games with Gold or whatever its called is another reason to console.

This boss battle is incredible. As you'd expect from Platinum Games.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

tuco wrote:

DarthHelmet86 wrote:I must be the most hardcore gamer of them all. With 8 consoles, 3 hand held devices, a high end gaming pc and an arcade cabinet.

That makes you collector. Whether you are hardcore gamer or not is imo determined by playtime.

I would argue it also depends on your difficulty settings.

That is another characteristic to consider. People who play a lot (what is a lot? I know) probably tend to play on higher difficulty settings as they have enough time to get to know the games they play well, which is usually condition needed to play on higher difficulty settings.

Despite what I said earlier, essentially its meaningless division: casual - hardcore. Its information to be used by those who make games or as sociological data but .. dirty casuals! noob, git gud, scrubs etc is to claim kind of superiority and/or vent various frustrations.

Multi-player games can be highly competitive, partly due to demographics they are populated with, which is kind of interesting as only very few people can put their virtual achievements on their resume. And single player? There is no AI, perhaps except Go and chinook, able to outsmart humans so there is not real challenge, competition and achievement imo.

Stuff like Dark Souls, well, yes its difficult but its training, its about learning game mechanics and exploiting them paired with demanding hand-eye coordination. The bosses cannot adapt so if someone watches YT and has decent hand-eye that someone can beat it. Same cannot be said about human opponents.