Homefront: PC or PS3?

Homefront is being released soon, and I’m pretty sure I’m going to get it. The only problem is, I’m not sure for which platform.

I usually play shooters on my Playstation, but I keep hearing that mouse and keyboard is actually better for it.

OTOH, I’m computer illiterate, so if there’s anything wrong with my system it could be a while before I get it running, although according to “Can you run it” I exceed the recommended specs.

For the PC, it’s also cheaper, but I like sitting on my couch and playing it that way on my big screen with surround sound.

What to do, what to do.

Am I correct in interpreting this as meaning that you aren’t used to the mouse/keyboard control scheme? If so, you should perhaps be warned that it has a learning curve attached to it.

Correct. I used to play a Battlefield game, but that was years ago.

Hmmm,

As long as you update your video drivers every 6 months or so, and you allow windows to auto update, the chances that you’ll run into an issue with the game are small, specially since your rig exceeds recommended specs. I haven’t run into issues with PC games since… well I can’t remember the last time.

If you have a capable system it will obvisouly look better on PC. higher rez, better performance, better graphics overall, plus some DX 10 and DX 11 features from what I hear.

You can also play with a game pad on PC if you find mouse + keyboard a bit too much to handle.

The only remaining issue for you is the couch + TV setup. So if running the PC game on your TV is not option (can’t move PC, don’t have a wire, PC is in another part of the house, etc.) that’s going to be the deciding factor. Can you enjoy the game wherever you have your PC, or do you absolutely need the couch experience?

ETA: Redacted, I misread the OP.

I saw a demo. Poor console gamers, no one stood a chance, even though the interface is not quite as accurate/responsive as a decent gaming mouse setup, the facsimile was good enough that he was pwning everyone.

Would that be considered cheating?

While I would probably get it on PC (although I’d play with a controller), your description and requirements lead me to believe you’d prefer the PS3 edition. I’d only go with the PC if you are wanting to try out PC gaming and are willing to either put up with the smaller screen or hook it up to the TV, or if you just can’t afford the more expensive option.

Even if the game were free, I’d just suggest getting both.

I’m adding this as a clarification to my post (#6).

It was a response to the now edited post #5. The original post pointed out some hardware workarounds that allowed you to use mouse + keyboard on console games.

I was just pointing out that I’ve seen said hardware in a few demos.

Thanks for all the responses. I think I’ve decided to go with the PC version of the game.

1: It’s cheaper
2: It’s on Steam
3: I actually have friends on Steam that I may be able to play with

I’m getting the game day 1 so feel free to add me to your friends list!

I’m Kinthalis there as well.

I would ignore the results of the poll. The posts in the thread may raise valid points, but the poll just ends up being “what do you play these games on?”

A while back we had a poll about whether someone should get a bethesda rpg on console or pc (maybe oblivion, maybe fallout) and he made it clear that his PC could handle it just fine, and the poll was split. But that’s a complete nonsense result. The stock oblivion game is mediocre at best - it’s broken in all sorts of ways and goes from a mediocre to great game with customization and mods. It looks massively better on the pc. It’s almost a completely different game. There are no multiplayer considerations like “all my friends already have it on ____” There’s no reason whatsoever to recommend the console version, it has no advantages at all over the PC version, and yet the votes on the poll were split. From that you can infer that no one is actually making reasoned recommendations when voting in these sorts of polls, they’re either answering “this is what system I play it on” or “this is what system I advocate for”, not “which game would be best for you given your situation”

Additionally, I never understood why people obsess over the big screen thing. You’re almost always getting less visual information, so it looks worse, but people are convinced that if it’s bigger it’s better. There was a thread a few weeks ago about a guy who ditched his beautiful extremely detailed apple 30" cinema monitor for a TV that had about 1/5th the resolution (as well as being inferior in every other way too) because it was 12" bigger, for use as a computer monitor. Bigger has one advantage - it’s easier to view from people spread over a wider area, so it’s easier for more people to watch it.

Even ignoring the graphical differences, just talking about optical differences - a 22" or 24" monitor at 2 feet away from you gives you way more visual information than a 50" TV 10 feet away at the same resolution. The smaller, closer monitor takes up a greater portion of your visual field - there’s a larger apparent area for your eyes to resolve detail on. On top of that, monitors are typically better than TVs in all the important areas - detail, color accuracy, reactivity, input lag, etc. So even discarding the console vs pc thing, you simply get much better detail with a close monitor than a far TV.

Throw in the console vs pc thing, and the PC is probably running at 4x or greater resolution than the console game, with AF and AA and better textures and all that other stuff that comes along with it. So adding all of that up, the console feed on the TV is going to look massively worse than a PC feed into a monitor. So it baffles me when people talk about wanting to game on their big TV as if it somehow improved the visual quality of the experience.

Dont knock it till you try it. pc/bstv>pc/m>console

Optimal viewing distance for my 82" is 9.6 ft that gives full immersion (read takes up field of vision) and the distance @ which 1080 p takes full effect for that screen size. Other specs depend entirely on how much you want to spend… pc/bstv>pc/m>console + who wants to watch/game in 3d on something so small

To the op:

I personally dont play anything but pc nowadays. Graphics are astounding and most games allow me a choice of kb/m or gamepad (my normal preference as I like to lounge while playing) Consoles can be fun as well, but if you are sporting a good tv and pc the choice is clear for most multi platform games.

A couple tips that will keep you gaming on pc/tv…

get it calibrated… isf calibration can get expensive so if its not in your budget there is some great software out there for cheap or free

if you dont have a wireless xbox controller get one… most pc games support them (and they dual for xbox ofcorse) can be gotten cheap (>45 with charge and play kit @newegg)

decent bluetooth multimedia kb/m will provide essential for gaming/(movies if wanted) i use mx5500

sorry if i got a bit long winded as others have said its whatever works best for the individual… just trying to highlight a few pros for pc

A 24" or 26" monitor close up fills your vision too. Some hypothetical super high res 1" screen right in front of your eyeball would too. There’s no optical benefit to large size further away.

“OMG I NEED BIGGER” is not something derived from optical benefit but e-peen or whatever.

I mean, the exception to this is if a bunch of people are watching something in the same room - then obviously bigger allows a bigger viewing area - but for one person watching one source, it doesn’t really matter if it’s a 1" super high res strip mounted on your eyeball or that giant screen they have in Dallas stadium from a few hundred yards away.

I actually suspect you could pick up more detail from the closer item even if the effective resolution is the same simply because of the way the eye focuses, but I’m not sure on that.

What the hell, I went ahead and preordered it. I feel silly spending $50 on a game - well, two games actually - considering I already have about a billion I need to play more. But I’m taking a shot that this might be great, and for multiplayer driven games it’s always cool to get in on day 1 and learn with the community. If not, I guess I can’t feel too bad for giving some money to the guys who gave me the great desert combat for free, and THQ is one of the publishers that doesn’t seem like pure evil.

One thing I know will drive me nuts is that the game has almost no recoil, even less than the silly COD recoil. At that point you might as well be using lasers or something instead of bullets. My only hope is that they’ll balance the PC controls differently and give the guns more recoils, since for some reason all the preview videos are from consoles.

Woops, I meant to make that last post in my thread about the game.

As mentioned in the above link, if you preorder Homefront from Steam you get Metro 2033 free. Metro 2033 has great gameplay but, at least for me, gets incredibly frustrating toward the end.

Well, the correct answer to this turned out to be “PS3,” because I just installed the PC version via Steam and it is the buggiest POS I have ever had the misfortune of involuntarily beta testing in my entire life.

???

I’ve been playing the single player and haven’t encountered any bugs. Is this a multi-player issue?

Well, one wouldn’t even let me launch. The other one was a control issue:

Problem 1: http://forums.steamgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1792888

Problem 2: http://www.homefront-game.com/forums/topic/4590

I did get both working eventually (though not optimally; I had to edit some .ini files), but I’m frankly not convinced something else won’t pop up later. I even got an unsolicited message from one of my Steam friends who saw me loading it up and asked me about it because he was having a problem, which turned out to be the same one. FWIW, Beef says it runs fine on his machine, but I find the QA a bit lacking.

Nothing to do but wait for v1.01, I guess…

Mine worked fine. I had some message about PhysX but I just restarted my computer and it fixed it. I’m glad because anything more than that then I would have been sunk.