Um, to be fair, those offers are absolutely steals (Mirror's Edge for €3? THQ's entire catalogue for the price of a single game?) so it's no wonder they're momentarily outselling a new game - don't forget that MW2's price on Steam is probably double what you pay in the stores.

P.

"How does one kill that which has no life?"

P.

If they'd brought out Oblivion for the PSP, I almost definitely would have bought one, but sadly, that was not to be (http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/oblivion-psp-finally-officially-canceled-320727.php).

P.

"People like this cannot possibly sustain an open, non-dictatorial government for the same reason they cannot sustain an Open Source phone."

Um, so because people don't want a phone which, on past experience of open software, would probably require hacking text files to get it work, they are supporting dictatorships and the New World Order.

Ohhhkay.

P.

"Some people like this type of gameplay. Who are you to judge?"

A retort which basically says that you can't criticize anything.

Sorry, but apart from being open source, I can't see anything to recommend this game. I don't mind ancient-looking graphics as long as there's some innovation, but this just appears to be a Quake III clone, a game which was already dated concepts-wise when it came out.

P.

Hmm, for some reason, Slashdot doesn't accept the Euro symbol. They must be funded by the Foreign Policy Research Institute. *dons tinfoil hat*

P.

I can only add my voice to the others above saying that, as a PC gamer, I'm baffled at this straw-man argument from the HP bloke. I'm currently playing Fallout 3 at maximum settings and resolution and at 85 frames per second on a PC that would cost today 450 (for CPU, memory, motherboard and graphics card) to build. And I recently bought a Dell laptop for 700 on which Crysis is very playable.

Yes, there are guys out there who want multiple GPU watercooled machines. But you don't actually need these. Just in the same way that there are guys who like go-faster decals and spoilers on their cars.

And companies like HP and Dell, by foisting the wretched integrated graphics chip on consumers, have done more damage to PC gaming than anyone else.

P.

"But would you buy four PCs: one for you, two for the kids, and one for their play date?"

Well, no, because I've no kids. :)

But you have a valid point of course; I'm not saying that gaming PCs are ideal for everyone or every situation. As you say, they have an advantage for same-room multiplayer as you point out.

But even in this case, I can see where the kids would have a console and Dad would have his gaming PC where he can frag undisturbed (that's what I intend to do one day!).

P.

Sorry, but you do actually sound a little like a troll. :) But I'll assume you're sincere.

"Consoles are better for gaming because the game development company can rely upon a specific hardware configuration."

Why does that make it better for the person who matter - the gamer? It's better for the development company, sure. Though if you're developing for XBox 360, publishing for the PC as well is relatively simple.

I have a gaming PC, a gaming laptop and a Wii. Of the three, the Wii gets by far the least use, gathering dust bunnies. Why do I game on the PC primarily?

1. Graphics: after gaming on a PC, looking at the Wii's Resident Evil 4 is like having sandpaper applied to my eyes; the pixels look the size of planets. One great thing about PC gaming is not just that new games look great - even older games can look better. After loving Oblivion, I've gone back to play Morrowind. If I was playing this on the XBox, it would only look as good as it did back in 2003. On the PC, I can take advantage of graphics cards upgrades and user-created mods such as the Morrowind Graphics Extender (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXEhlyqlzU0) so that the game looks far better than it did back in 2003. Which leads me to...

2. Mods & Community: Being a console owner is essentially a passive consumer experience. Sure, there are the beginnings of allowing user-created content on consoles, but this is still in its infancy and will _always_ be tightly controlled. For the PC, it's a collaborative experience; even a non-coder like me has been able to get involved, working on the unofficial Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines patch.
Just one example; look at the amount of mods and tweaks available for the PC version of Oblivion; you can customise it to your heart's content.

3. Meeces: I just can't play FPSs on gamepads. Have tried and failed. Same with strategy games. The mouse just seems to fit these games a lot better. Gamepads are fine for driving games but since I don't really like those, I don't them much. I actually have one anyway - the XBox controller works great with the PC wireless dongle - but those times I occasionally use one.

Oh, and I don't get the supposed "benefit" of consoles that you can slouch on the couch while playing them. If I'm playing a shooter online, I want to sit up alert in a nice comfy desk chair.

4. Portability: I can play the same games on both my desktop and my laptop, and using Microsoft's FolderShare (http://www.foldershare.com/) I can seamless and invisibly have my savegame files synchronised between the machines.

5. Cheaper games: People often point out that PCs cost a lot more than consoles. Very true. But, I'd be buying a PC anyway for non-gaming functions. OK, sure, I have to pay a bit more for a gaming PC over a normal PC. But new PC game releases cost around 20 less than the console equivalent. So, if you you're say buying 2 new releases a month, that adds up to almost 500 a year saved, which is easily enough to keep on the upgrade path.

P.