Yeah, DSL is $70 a month before any other fees they want to stick you with on top of a contract, and satellite will never appease since it's also more expensive AND comes with a lame download limit. Those are the options here. Which is really too bad because if there was ever an argument for PC gaming over console gaming it would definitely be in the MMO category. I'm going to miss out on Star Wars and Guild Wars. Totally sucks.
I would have to say to get the PS3, it can be a better gaming experience and there is an extremely wide selection of games, and you can also play PS2 games when you download the free backwards compatibility software from the PS Store
I don't blame people for switching. With more game titles and less frequent hardware updates needed (usually only when they come out with a new console) it can be a better experience. However, I still think pc games blow away console games and if more people stayed with pc's they would make more games. I still see ton of people online in the pc games I play.
Stick with Both. ( Even tho i suggest Xbox )
I have an XBOX360 and might be getting a Wii because it really is fun to play.
But for Serious games like ANY FPS,,, PC all the way.
Consoles are good for certain games and Racing.
RPG, FPS games are always far far far superior on PC. And always will be.
However..... Red Dead Redemption,, is great fun on Xbox.
I agree with Tepid and would like to add that the whole RTS genre is practically only playable on PCs. If you want a brain workout: Warcraft+Starcraft is the way to go.
I remember playing Baldur's Gate when I was a kid... Such an awesome RPG game, but so so so friggin' difficult! I could never get away from it on my own. xD
Like I said in my previous posts, a console is only worth for its exclusive games, no more no less, so as long as you watch what you buy and play on a console, you should stick with both. Why? Well, just a few small examples: Crysis was never released on consoles (and IMHO C2 shouldn't be either), and Dragon Age: Origins gameplay was seriously limited on consoles because of the camera movements. Besides, how many times have you played a game such as Prince of Persia which had awkward and frustrating camera angles on a console, but would produce much better results and had more freedom to be manipulated on the PC port.
On the other hand, consoles host some great games such as Uncharted, which would be a shame to miss out on.
Yeah, that is the one thing I did miss. Real Time Strategy Games are a must play on PC only.
Trying to play them on a console (and I have) is near impossible. Unless you have 5 minutes to wait till the cursor moves where you want it. Even when they try to make all the buttons do what you need, they never get them really optimally right.
With the PC, I feel a lot more immersed into games.
Just to add my $0.02, same as what the others recommend: get a PS3 only if you really want the exclusives.
"Wide selection of games"? Trust these guys, nothing beats the PC. I can tolerate crap PC games because there are so many others that I don't even need to think about the crap ones. However, the crap PS3 games will forever stare back at me from the depths of the online store. I mean, I really enjoyed stuff like Uncharted and Valkyria Chronicles, but then I look at something like Fat Princess and it makes me despair. I'm not saying FP is awful - in fact I got a few enjoyable evenings out of it - but try to look at it from a technical standpoint: is this kind of game really something representative of what the PS3 can do? It's a waste of the machine's capabilities - and your money. To put it bluntly, it's filler; something you'd expect to see in the shovelware-dominated catalog of the Wii.
My recommendation is only get the PS3 if you really want to play those exclusives and can afford to take the $$$ hit.
PS3 isn't even backwards compatible any longer, and they run hot. Screw that, stick with the PC or grab a new XBOX 360
Quote