Consoles are superior to PC's, the only good thing that PC's have contributed to gaming is the first person shooter

>crysis
>on of the greatest pc exclusives
stopped reading right there

It's better to be part of the PC Masterrace than the Console Remasterrace.

>I hope Hiro makes Consolewar threads a bannable offense
>2. Flaming/flagrant "fanboyism"/etc. will not be tolerated.

They are, it's just too subjective to ever get enforced in anything but the most flagrant situations.

why do people feel the need to justify their favorite piece of plastic?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias

subscribed

PCs are superior to consoles, but its not because consoles are holding back video games. Rather, consoles that do not have anything unique to offer that are otherwise the same as other consoles and the PC but has worse hardware than what a PC only have exclusives as the reason for owning them. Exclusives, generally speaking, are an anti-consumer practice in that 3rd party games are being arbitrarily locked to a particular system rather than allowing for consumers to have the choice of how they want their game available to them. Furthermore, unlike the PC, consoles do not have replaceable hardware, meaning that once a new console comes out to replace the old one, the older one will eventually stop getting games and you'll have to turn on different systems just to play older games, as backwards compatibility is not feasible for every single console. Not even emulation is totally feasible in such a closed space like that. PC's do not suffer this; you'll still be able to play all your older games and newer games on your PC, generally speaking.

This is not to say that exclusives are always a bad thing; I said generally because there are instances such as that with Bayonetta 2 where a game might not otherwise exist if not for an exclusivity deal. That of course doesn't make the exclusivity good for consumers, but it means that there are more games available to consumers, which is a good thing. I also think it makes sense for 1st party games to be exclusives as they are the company's own games; rather, I take issue with exclusives such as what we see with games like Persona and Atelier, where they are exclusive but not actually tied to the system.

I think consoles, if they desire to have a reason to be, should try to offer something to the table that isn't able to be done on other platforms. The Vita and 3DS are both handhelds and thus have a functionality that the PC, PS4, and Xbox One do not. The Wii U has its split screen function, giving it a semi-unique feature.

I really hope that this is copypasta, because if you're so bad at identifying bait threads that you actually typed all that out then we really need to bring back "lurk moar" as the board slogan.

it's ok when Nintendo does it

>you will never be a pathetic sonycuck
Thank god

I know its bait but people who post shitty bait sometimes genuinely believe what they say, and taking posts seriously sometimes eventually gets people to stop shitposting and actually reply in earnest.
I mentioned the Vita too as being a positive thing for gaming.
Its just that Nintendo's primary focus seems to be to be a toy company, so it tries to make weird gimmicky things.