yeah i was going to say...all the advantages to a PC were countered by the PS3's PSN and keyboard/mouse ability (in case anyone didn't know, it will take USB m/k too...I use a bluetooth keyboard, and my 2.4 ghz logitech wireless mouse with a usb reciever plugged into the PS3...it works great)...

the PC does have advantages that he didn't really address...such as a pot of memory that no console can touch...but PC advantages are always "potential"...it is up to the end user to purchase all that stuff, which even when building the rig yourself...can add up quickly...

that PC online gaming is still more free compared to PSN, because you don't have to pay for extra content most of the time. And you can also Download lots of user made content.

As for moding games on the PS3, I very much dealt it will become a very big thing on the PS3. No will be no where near as much moding as the PC.

And as for the mouse and keyboard, you can only use it in the store and XMB, most games don't support m/k on the PS3(you got the fragFX controller,half way there, although its still not as good as m/k).

The real advantage of consoles is that you have a system thats gonna have games made for those spec's for many years to come. Everyone's got the same spec's so games are more likely to work for everyone. You don't have to upgrade, costing you a bundle. Their very easy to work, and have few problems(except for the xbox360. x2 breakage).

I would list some good things about PC, but I'm not really gonna list anything that someone else hasn't already brought up. The thing I really love about PC is that you can really customize your controls(button layout,different mice/keyboards, binds etc etc)

At the end of the day, its all about whether you could be bothered having to upgrade, patch games, maintenance etc. And whether if these things out weigh the freedoms of using PC. IMO it does get quite tiresome after a while, and I am looking more at consoles now for gaming purposes.

Oh and by the way FPS and RTS games still kick ass on PC, consoles are just a poor adaptation of PC versions. :-)

Lol @ mods for the PS3. To think that online content for consoles can even hold a candle to the PC is laughable at best. We're talking a drop of water vs a Pacific Ocean here. There will never be an equivalent of a Counterstrike or Dady of Defeat for the consoles, and thats just two examples out of possibly hundreds. The great thing about PC gaming is you never get nickle and dimed for things like map packs.

im becoming a pc gamer,i can experience awesome things like creating my pc map editting like gears of war pc and more

there is one thing that you idiot pc fans are really forgetting, and that is you believe that your pcs have surpassed ps3, and that is something that is off by miles, i really wish i can agree with you, but the fact of the matter is, is that you all seem to forget e3 2005, you forget the presentation of graphics done by the ps3, but all of a sudden now you believe that the ps3 isnt able to do those graphics, and now you feel that the pcs have some way surpassed the ps3, but sony is proving more and more that the ps3 can do all the stuff they showed, you say the ps3 is underpowered, but it has no end, and you say its underpowered, but killzone 2 quite frankly blows away everything, unless you compare it to cutscenes, and that is not even a year into the ps3s lifecycle, you my friends, i believe you are not fully grasping the machine that sony has built this time, you forget they built a supercomputer in the ps3 this gen, and a gpu that many think is weak, and has memory restraints, but fall short of the true knowledge of the cell or rsx, the ps3 is a machine that will not truly be used to any extent of its real potential til about really 3 or 4 more years into its cycle, there are already games on the ps3 that look like cg, but thats one thing that pc fans forget, that sony built that supercomputer inside of the ps3 to make cg quality graphics ingame, the only reason there is no game currently out that has completely destroyed any of you pcs high end or low end is because no budget is high enough to do it, killzone is a massive start, and thats only in the first 7 months of ps3s lifecycle, and you really wanna say that crysis looks better than it, crysis looks nice, but really doesnt look like cg, its the best looking game, for its setting, see crytek shot imagery from wherever the setting for crysis is, that is why it appears so real, and the budget was 26 million, the graphics engine is an engine that is sorta veteran in gaming, so that also is reason for it appearing so "realistic" to all of you, as i recall, no other game is set where crysis is, so you really cant say that crysis is the best looking game.

Now one other thing i want to point out.

killzone and crysis were both in development for a long time, but the difference is, which one was in development for 3 years plus on actual hardware, and wich was just in development as a whole for about 2 and a half years on paper and drawings and scripting, and no hardware, just concept renders on duplicate hardware, that was incomplete?

the answer is, crysis looks good, but its been in development for years, maybe 3 and a half to 4 years on actual pc hardware, and a 26 million dollar budget, with a veteran graphics engine, physics engine, and operating system, being backed by two of the best developers, EA and Crytek. and back at e3 2005, there was an actual running demo of crysis as seen below:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=...

the first portion was WAY back at e3 2005, and the most recent came afterwards

on the other hand, we have killzone 2, also an amazing looking game, looks like ingame cg, and thousands of things going on, onscreen, but the thing is it was at e3 2005, but the only problem is, was it was a trailer and not realtime, but many took it as a thought that the ps3 cant do that in realtime, but this year at e3 2007 and even before e3 2007 sony was even more proving with the ps3 there truly is no limit even by the movie standards.

now the thing is, when more developers like Guerilla, and even guerilla dig deeper into their pockets, games will continue to come more and more into movie level, the thing is pc fans wont be ready, because they think that the pcs have really surpassed ps3, but they just dont remember key things in e3 2005, but hey i will give you the link, you go check it out:

http://www.gamespot.com/vid...

maybe if you see this, and really pay attention to it, ps3 isnt even supposed to be at the level of graphics they showed at e3 2005 YET, although they have surpassed it with killzone 2, how do you think your pcs will stand in later years?

it really wont be pretty, but hear, listen carfully to this presentation, you may learn more about the ps3 than you currently do:

http://www.gamespot.com/vid...

afterwards, hopefully you wont talk so utterly recklessely about things you dont research, its like saying russia is a weak country, yes, they may be weak in their economy, but their millitary, and weapons are second to none, they have the nuclear power to blow up every country and themselves 2 times, so dont speak so recklessely, it ill come back to haunt you

oh, and by the way, killzone 2 has 2 different graphics engines, both of which look like cg, and it was all done in no more than 1 year and 6 months, because febuary 2006 is the first time an actual ps3 model was put together, though incomplete, it was the first actual model of the ps3, running powerful tech demos even then, this is testament of what is to come

Dude, I love my PS3, but you're comments are not good. PC's are more flexible with upgrades and have many price points from cheaper to super expensive. It's not that the PS3 might not be better, but how can you knock PC when they have about a billion configurations for everyone. And I hate to say this but in 7-10 years from now, you won't be able to upgrade the PS3's graphix capacity, but you will be able to throw the baddest graphix card in a PC. Common, stop bashing everything that is not PS3. Again I love my PS3 (and am thoroughly impressed) but PC has some major advantages.

I think youre kinda off. Sure the killzone trailer is cool, but it isnt THAT spectacular. Im kind of dissapointed that its VERY grey and the lightning isnt really that nice.
There is no other graphics engine at this moment that can handle shadows, Transparency and all the other lightning goodies like the Cryengine2.
I mean theres a rediculous amount of detail. The Palm leafs actually lets trough light. Put it between you and a lightsource and you will se that it isnt just a static texture. Alot of stuff in Crysis/cryengine 2 is really amazing. Since its a sandbox engine i think well se alot of games from it in the future. Its in no way limited to jungle, but Crysis is set on a jungle island, and its the perfect way to show off some of the really nice Physics in Crysis.

And the development argument is pure crap. The Demo we have seen is probably heavily scripted. Alot of effort were put into that part of the development, since showing something good long before relase builds hype. Its still far from release with a TBA 2008. It looks good but im having doubts how much of the game is complete at this stage.
Also its very possible to do massive amounts of work on a game before the engine/hardware is done. DX10 effects and compability were being coded long before we got our hands on the first Dx10 gfx card.
Some obvious flaws from the video were the lack of good pixelshading and other texture effects. will probably be fixed but still.

So it could be something like this. Crysis is relased during 07. At the time i have no doubts it will be the best looking game (i dont get the whole CG/reality thing things that are stylized, like GOW gets more tiresome to look at long before something that leans towards realism), we then have, oh about a year untill Killzone 2 shows up. No doubt it will look great. But by then the PCs already have another generation of GFX cards, and probably some true Dx10 games out or coming out soon.

I thought the current gen consoles would stay ahead of PC games about a year then hang on by its tail, a little behind but not much. The x360 did a good job, the PS3 on the other hand is a little late and will be run over by "next gen" pcgames.

The consoles get Optimized. The PCs get better hardware AND optimization...

Windows now supports the 360 controller, and the PC is getting games like Devil May Cry 4, Mass Effect, Lost Planet, Bioshock, and Gears of War.

I am not arguing that the PC has more exclusives. I am just saying that that gap is closing. And will continue to close. So the PC is becoming a very versatile platform for gaming.

And the whole 'PS3 is a better value' is relative to the individual situation. The PC can do a lot more things, and has real world benefits in the workplace. If you are buying a PC EXCLUSIVELY for gaming, then I think the consoles in general are the better buy. Unless you like the FPS, RTS, MMO type games.