PCs are not required to be upgraded every year, or even every three. You can upgrade every five or six years, just like the consoles that are stuck in a certain configuration for their entire life. The 360 was already underpowered compared to modern PCs a year ago. Now, its only getting worse. Now, the graphical blemishes aren't as apparent on a TV eight feet away, but on a monitor two feet away, the ugly really comes out. I never really understood why someone would want to voluntarily trap themselves in a timewarp to 2006(or 2001, when the last gen came out).

every 3 years...

#14 only continues to pwn himself by bringing up peoples mothers. He can apparently only impress himself.

#21, I believe the argument should be better put that a console will last many years with a relatively low entrance fee. You buy the console and thats all you need to spend. On the other hand the initial cost of a PC is usually twice the cost of a console system. This being said, PC is a favored choice in my opinion because you can upgrade it as time goes on to keep it going for a couple extra years. I still own my PC from college and it can still play many games including halflife2, though it is at lower settings, but HL2 is much newer than the computer is. Also, with a PC you have the option to create as high or low standards as you want so the cost can be variable depending on what you want to do with the system. Moreover, the controls of a PC (keyboard and mouse) will more than likely always be better than a consoles controller.

It would be nice if they didn't blur the execution scenes automatically... you should have a choice. Still, until the next-gen Nintendo finally gets HD, there's no point in buying this game for anything but PS3 or Xbox.

that was a good post until you brought up your computer (who cares?)