The 90s was arguably both the peak of PC gaming and console gaming and also the decade where they were at their most different.PC had primarily turn-based and real-time strategy games, city building/management games, computer RPGs, and first-person shooters (Examples: Civilization, Age of Empires, RollerCoaster Tycoon, Fallout, DOOM). Console had mostly fast-reaction action games, especially platformers and run n' guns, as well as Japanese RPGs (Examples: Super Mario World, Gunstar Heroes, Final Fantasy VI). Basically PC games = more based on mental skill with the obvious exception of FPS, console games = more based on physical skill and reaction times with the exception of JRPGs which are a simpler version of computer RPGs (not a value judgement).Which style do you prefer?
I prefer idort
>>10911326This.I don't. I played all three. There's no fucking war here. Play games, enjoy games. What the fuck even?That's truer today than ever when PCs literally ARE consoles of the 90s as well. I literally have Retroarch next to DOSBox and UT99 and Q3.This thread has no real purpose. Even if someone has a preference towards one or the other... yeah and? Are you doing a demographic study for some shit? Where are you going with this?
>>10911347>>10911341It's not that deep I was just interestedThe platforms had so many differences in game design philosophy that kind of went away as time went on into the 2000s and 2010s and the platforms got more homogenized. I see on /v/ 3x3 threads that people still usually gravitate towards "PC type games" or "console type games".
>>10911326Civilization, Age of Empires 2, RollerCoaster Tycoon and Doom all had console ports.
>>10911387But they're PC games primarily
In the 90s PC was always the better choice for hardware... but it cost ALOT.. However consoles had the superior softwares. There were plenty of cool PC games but they were designed around mouse and keyboard. The consoles were easier to develop for having static hardware and expansion capability.
>>10911685>The consoles were easier to develop for having static hardware and expansion capability.Kek, no.
>>10911693While some consoles were nigthmares, the period between 1995 and 1999, with its 4-5 competing graphical instruction sets, was a low point for PC development.
>>10911326Your opening statement is why one would pick both back in the 90s. Not like now where the genres are shared.
>>10911326i'd say they are complementary and i enjoyed both just as much. i never was into JRPGs though.
>>10911326not because of those kusogeit was because PC got flavor something current pc don't have.Wanted a unique keyboard no big deal you had dozens or hundreds of types of keyboards.Wanted a mouse unique,you had hundreds or thousands of them some even similar to arcade sticks.Wanted a screen you chose what you wanted and then install the specific driver of the monitor and adjusting those super resolutions up to 12k x 8k (unlike now).Wanted to customize your OS and make it more futuristic no big deal you could do it (some of us modified the whole windows XP kernel up to the desktop).
when do you guys think the PC permanently overtook consoles for both exclusives and multiplats. I think late 7th gen is when PC multiplats where better in every way than their console versions with no exceptions. 6th gen and early 7th gen PC multiplats weren't that good. they either looked like shit or were poorly optimized.
consoles were always useless devices they were cool and had a purpose in the early 90s when PCs still couldn't render graphics properly and C64 looked like shit compared to NES, but by the mid-90s the PC was capable of rendering great graphics and by 1998 permanently overtook consoles in graphical prowess. it's stupid to have a separate device to do what a PC is already capable of doing.
>>10913894Up until (including) the 6th gen, architectures were way too different for easy porting, hence corners had to be cut. By the late 7th, PCs got better at multicore processing, meaning the PS3 Cell (and X360's Xenon) architecture could be (at least partially) replicated via multithreading. And from the 8th onward it doesn't matter anymore, since PC has "won" the "console wars", and 2 out of 3 consoles are now HTPCs on the inside.
>>10911326>PC had primarilynoPC always had games of all kinds and there wasn't a "primary" focus on any particular genre. Those you mentioned in that point were not as available or viable for consoles, but they weren't the only kinds of games on PC.> PC games = more based on mental skill with the obvious exception of FPSThere have always been way more action-based kinds of games on PC than just FPS, even in genres you seem to think are "exclusive™" to consoles
>>10911347Back then there kinda wasSaturn got crapped on by the PC games for 98-99. I think that's why it didn't do well it was a mix of ps1 lite and 32x gen gamesPc was already putting out great fps games and was a lot more popular. Saturn had a few ports, racers (good) and shmups but everyone was busy playing gta2,blood,unreal mutliplayer pc then so it got ignored (at least where I was it did
>>10913894>when do you guys think the PC permanently overtook consoles for both exclusives and multiplatsIntel Core 2
>>10911326>BasicallyBascially PC games = games for adults and late teensconsole games = games for little children who still use diapers
