Gamespy's 'Top 10 Ways to Know You're a PC Snob'

[A Black Falcon]

Ultima Exodus was almost a direct port of the PC version, only with better sound (sound cards hadn't really taken hold in the PC world yet) and worse graphics to a small extent (still did that weird "only see stuff your characters can see" effect). It still let you fight a loosing battle against some kid in town if you felt like it though.

I don't know about Ultima III, but by Ultima V or VI the console versions (such as existed) were nowhere near the same as the PC ones. Cut content, more linearity, fewer features, etc... I'd doubt that the earlier ones would be much different, other than that the PC versions themselves were simpler so there might be less to change.

I've played One Must Fall, and I've played Street Fighter 2. I've got a pretty good idea of which of those is more complex. The fact is, different genres, for various reasons (only sometimes related to things like interface like in RTS games), make their home on different platforms.

Well yes, fighting games are very weak to mostly nonexistant on PC. One of the few genres that goes in favor of consoles. The vast majority of game types are more complex on PC.

RPGs, well that's a matter of opinion. I've played Oblivion and Torment to an extent, and I've also played a number of Japanese RPGs. Some are pretty simplistic, but some show a lot of thought and planning into a complicated system (Final Fantasy XII), and some are simplistic at first glance but have a lot of subtle strategy involved (Pokemon) and some are just plain simple (Final Fantasy 1), though that last one was made when PC RPGs were pretty simplistic as well.

Console RPGs might have some depth in the character development system, but they have linear plots, no character creation or player choice in where things go, mostly linear game design too (much less open-endedness), and with few exceptions less complicated battle systems. "stand in two lines and hit eachother" is not depth... console games certainly do like to add complexity in some categories, but they don't usually create deeper, more strategic battle systems, or complex branching plots where your actions matter, or any of the other things that make PC RPGs what they are (and better than console ones).

Really, it's not a debatable point that PC games are more complex than console ones. It's a fact. Are you honestly going to say that there's a console strategy game out there with the depth of Starcraft (no, SC64 doesn't count. No online means it's irrelevant.), Warcraft III, Supreme Commander, or other major RTSes? Or Rome: Total War or Medieval: Total War? Europa Universalis or any of Paradox's other overly complex grand strategy titles? 4X games like Master of Orion or GalCiv II? Graphic adventure games of the quality and depth of the PC classics (there are a few, but very few)? Wargames (nearly nonexistent on consoles, some of the most complex games around on PC) And then you could go to those other genres I mentioned before like flight sims and space or mech sims (mostly older, but there are a few newer space games like the economically-focused X series)... Etc, etc, etc. Really, come on. Console and PC games aim at different markets, and that shows in the kinds of games released for each system.

I mean... does Gran Turismo even have car damage yet? (not that I like or play racing sims, I don't, I greatly prefer futuristic and arcade racing games (which are mostly, but not exclusively, on consoles), but still, in comparison...)

I'm not saying console games are bad of course, as I like simple games too for sure, but that doesn't change that essential fact.