I've always been a huge fan of PC gaming, more so than any console or portable system I've ever owned. If you know how to put a good gaming PC together, it's nothing short of the most versatile, extensible gaming platform one could ever own.

The variety of titles available is just as wide or wider than most consoles, it has way more options for control inputs, from the mouse and keyboard, to game-pads and joysticks. But perhaps even more important is the fact that PC's can  be upgraded to handle newer, more graphics intensive titles without the need to buy an entirely new system. A new graphics card or a memory upgrade can work wonders in an aging gaming machine. Of course, there's a catch.

Keeping up with new PC gaming technology is a lot harder and more costly than purchasing the newest $300 gaming platform. If you're just upgrading one part, say the graphics board, or the processor, that's a good, cheap solution. But every so often, form factors change, motherboards need replacing, there's a new gold standard in graphics cards, memory and hard drives. All that together will cost you way more than a traditional console. 

The need for such hardware changes wouldn't be necessary, however, if game designers weren't so intent on taking advantage of every new graphical bell and whistle that comes along. Not to say that I don't appreciate the new technology or ultra-realistic environments, it's just that, well...my aging rig can't handle all the really new, exciting stuff, and I'm flat broke.

But I don't think a good game requires really good graphics to be successful. What it needs is polished, solid gameplay. Graphics should come second. In truth, most modern games look good, but not every one of them is a good game.

By constantly upping requirements on PC gamers, that sector of the gaming industry is actually losing potential customers. I imagine that, like me, not every PC user out there has the cash to buy new components every couple years in order to support the latest and greatest. So we have to pass up newer stuff and stick with games that still run well on our systems, old stand-by's like Counter-Strike: Source, other Half Life-based games, and mods that help refresh older titles.

Game developers should take a cue from companies like Blizzard and other developers like Ironclad (makers of the awesome strategy game Sins of a Solar Empire), who make their titles incredibly scalable. Unlike consoles, where you pop in the game and it works, PC's are certainly more difficult to program for, as the number of hardware configurations is practically limitless.

But why focus on making sure a game works on the next generation of PC hardware when there's still a current generation that works perfectly well? Frankly, it seems like a waste to me, and a slap in the face to game fans who have little money to shell out for new games, let alone new hardware.

Should PC game developers keep game requirements more reasonable?

No matter how much Rizzo wants to deny it, germs do exist, and yes, humans are susceptible to them, some more than others. Take me, for example. I exercise, I eat well, wash my hands only as much as is necessary — a good, healthy lifestyle. Of course, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference. When those microscopic organisms decide your body is their new home, there isn't much you can do about it. So last week, I caught my first cold of the year.

And it sucks.

But the parental rule has been carved into my mind, that rule being: "Unless you have a fever, are throwing up or bleeding profusely, you've got to get out of bed and get on with you life".

It's good advice. If you're not dying, don't act like you are. Except, even if you're still functional, it doesn't make you any less sick. Which brings me to my point: how do you fight a nasty cold while still maintaining an air of manliness? A few suggestions for you: (they certainly helped me) More Here...