And mods...I think the reason people with a preference prefer PC gaming is because of graphics. If they aren't really important to someone they might as well play on console where the games are (generally) better optimized.
And mods...
and games with an active community for more than 2 years...
and 20+ years worth of games on one system...
Any further?
I think the reason people with a preference prefer PC gaming is because of graphics. If they aren't really important to someone they might as well play on console where the games are (generally) better optimized.
No, there are other reasons.
People may prefer mouse and keyboard controls over gamepads, especially for shooter games.
They may enjoy strategy, MMORPG, or MOBA games, which are practically non-existent on consoles.
They may already have a decent PC and don't see a point in spending extra on a console.
They may like Steam and other services which often have discounts on games.
They may like classic games which aren't available on current consoles.
They may like using mods for games.
Plenty of reasons people could prefer to play on PC other than "the graphics are better".
Consoles aren't sold with SSDs standard, but you can replace their HDDs and upgrade to SSDs to get better load times even on consoles.This is a nice summary. Another one would be load times. SSDs aren't found on modern consoles yet, but they could really stand to get them. Some of the graphically intense games have ridiculous load times on consoles.
If a game has a powerful visual element I like to be able to run it well, but it's not even close to the only reason I game (primarily) on PC. As an example, I thoroughly enjoy the Ys games but even relatively modern IGPs run them very well. Except for Celceta, most of them will run on PC one way or another.
Consoles aren't sold with SSDs standard, but you can replace their HDDs and upgrade to SSDs to get better load times even on consoles.
Battlefront, best visuals and audio in a game.
gameplay sucks.
Fallout 4
visuals are like 1980 and totally crap engine.
sound ok,
gameplay is great.
Gameplay comes first.
if that sucks you cant wrap up a turd in gloss and call it good and smelly.
dragon age inq
superb visuals, audio and gameplay.
really enjoyable.
only game I played that allows one to actually enjoy the visuals with the gameplay.
Doom had good sound and music (with a proper sound card), that made the game-play half as enjoyable, imo.The video game I still play the most to this day is DOOM.
Gameplay is #1, good art/aesthetic is #2. Visual bells and whistles are nice but get the gameplay right and make sure the artwork/visual style is good and I'll love it.
Consoles aren't sold with SSDs standard, but you can replace their HDDs and upgrade to SSDs to get better load times even on consoles.
Can a game have potato visuals and still be considered 'good' or even 'great' in this modern age?
Is there a cut-off for what is and isn't considered acceptable in terms of graphics anymore?
If the answer is yes, does that also apply to indie/small developers who can't afford to drop big $$$ into an engine/assets?
Depends on game or genre. If game doesnt have you in intense concentration most of the time, and where you are free to look around and explore, graphics are paramount imo. If it has you intensely focused on what you're doing (esp RTS games), graphics may be less important.Nope. Look at how many people are playing minecraft. Or how critics and players alike are loving games like Darkest Dungeon, Papers Please and Terraria.
Gameplay is still king.