Question for PC gamers...

[Anomaly1964]

And first let me say that I myself am a PC gamer...

But do you start asking yourself "Am I crazy for wanting/needing to buy a new $350 GPU just so that I can play the newest game when the (game) looks and plays pretty darn good on a console that costs about the same as my video card alone?"

Do you ever begin to question your ROI?

I mean when you look at games like Borderlands you realize that TOP END graphics are NOT a requirement for a game to be fun. Would Dragon Age: Inquisition be any LESS fun with Borderland style graphics...?

And I KNOW you can do so much more than play games on your PC but do you think there might be a MIDDLE GROUND device at a price point between the CONSOLE ($395) and a nice gaming rig ($1300) some day?

If they would come out with a quality, reliable mouse and game pad (WSAD, Run, Jump keys) for consoles, I would be VERY tempted...

I don't know, I just feel there comes a point where FPS and shadows begin...over shadowing...the FUN of gaming.

Hope to hear your thoughts...

Thanks!

 

[Majcric]

Nope, not at all. I enjoy trying out new hardware. And the thing most console gamers fail to see over the long haul console gaming is actually more expensive.

 

[Anomaly1964]

Nope, not at all. I enjoy trying out new hardware. And the thing most console gamers fail to see over the long haul console gaming is actually more expensive.

How do you figure that?

 

[Jodell88]

How do you figure that?

Older games on a console tend to be more expensive. I just picked up Tomb Raider (2013) for US $3 on Amazon. Consoles are still US$20.

Even now the PC version is $10 cheaper than the PS3 version and $8 cheaper than the Xbox360 version.

 

[DeadFred]

 

[Anomaly1964]

Don't get me wrong, ALL I game on is the PC but it just sucks that I have to spend $350 if I wanna play DA:I...

 

[tential]

Pc can do all I ask of it. A console I still need a pic with.

My pc games, does live TV, does dvr, plays back my whole movie/TV library, Web browser, emulates older Consoles, and more. All from directly in front of my TV.

A console still requires me to have my pc out if I want to respond to a friend online. It's a nice interface and a seamless experience but if it doesn't do all I want it to do, that is all useless for me.

You're in control with a pc, so I like that.

 

[Annisman*]

How do you figure that?

http://www.ign.com/articles/2011/12/13/is-pc-gaming-really-more-expensive-than-consoles

 

[tential]

Don't get me wrong, ALL I game on is the PC but it just sucks that I have to spend $350 if I wanna play DA:I...

You'd have to spend that $350 to pay on console for the console. Pointless cost to even talk about.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Always was into the highend hardware but these days i am pretty happy with my 26'' 720p t.v and my 770 for gaming.Pump up a bit of AA and drop some settings and everything is playable without worry.

Seeing lots of these new games even push a single 780 at 1080p,my t.v isn't glorious like a 4k monitor but i can sure get away with enjoying gaming on whats now a low end mid range card even still.Don't got all that much money these days for the hobby to care for having the best of everything.

If people always had to have the best of everything,you will always be buying something.

 

[tential]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2011/12/13/is-pc-gaming-really-more-expensive-than-consoles

Ask yourself this OP when you read this post:
If PC Gaming was $650 for 8 years (hardware wise), why do you need a $350 GPU to play this new game already? Shouldn't your more expensive than $650 PC still fly perfectly?

If that ign article was right (2011 article), then today the GTX 560Ti would still be a great card for new games. In fact, why do they only recommend 1 stick or ram? Why not 2 for dual channel?
So does this even seem like a trust worthy source for pc gaming if they can't even do basic PC assembly?

Most of these arguments are catered to a certain crowd to make themselves feel better about their purchase. It's never an apples to apples comparison. Console gaming is cheaper, do I care about that? Absolutely not... so it driving a smart car, yet how many people do that?

Do what fits your needs.

The cost argument for PC gaming will always fail, but PC gaming isn't great because of cost but because of flexibility and scalability.

 

[Hinda65]

Think about your ROI this way....

When you consider how many hrs of entertainment your going to get out of that $350 card over the course of 1 - 2 years ( or whatever your upgrade path is) its a steal.

I'm sure most people who drop coin on a high card are going to play a minimum of 100hrs/yr....that's $3.50/hr entertainment value.....

Figure your scenario...buy the $350/card + $50 DA:I....50hrs of gameplay = $8.00/hr
just for that game alone.....

 

[xantub]

I'm a frugal gamer (if there's really such a thing), so I never spend more than $250 in a video card (usually less than $200), so I always buy previous gen cards that last me some 2-3 years. It helps that I'm not a FPS slave, I don't even check how many FPS I'm getting (could be 15 or 60, I don't really care). I figure it's saved me thousands of dollars so far.

 

[Anomaly1964]

Ask yourself this OP when you read this post:
If PC Gaming was $650 for 8 years (hardware wise), why do you need a $350 GPU to play this new game already? Shouldn't your more expensive than $650 PC still fly perfectly?

If that ign article was right (2011 article), then today the GTX 560Ti would still be a great card for new games. In fact, why do they only recommend 1 stick or ram? Why not 2 for dual channel?
So does this even seem like a trust worthy source for pc gaming if they can't even do basic PC assembly?

Most of these arguments are catered to a certain crowd to make themselves feel better about their purchase. It's never an apples to apples comparison. Console gaming is cheaper, do I care about that? Absolutely not... so it driving a smart car, yet how many people do that?

Do what fits your needs.

The cost argument for PC gaming will always fail, but PC gaming isn't great because of cost but because of flexibility and scalability.

So are you saying I could play DA:I on my current PC?

 

[Anomaly1964]

Think about your ROI this way....

When you consider how many hrs of entertainment your going to get out of that $350 card over the course of 1 - 2 years ( or whatever your upgrade path is) its a steal.

I'm sure most people who drop coin on a high card are going to play a minimum of 100hrs/yr....that's $3.50/hr entertainment value.....

Figure your scenario...buy the $350/card + $50 DA:I....50hrs of gameplay = $8.00/hr
just for that game alone.....

Well put...

And again I don't wanna console game...LOL!

 

[Anomaly1964]

I'm a frugal gamer (if there's really such a thing), so I never spend more than $250 in a video card (usually less than $200), so I always buy previous gen cards that last me some 2-3 years. It helps that I'm not a FPS slave, I don't even check how many FPS I'm getting (could be 15 or 60, I don't really care). I figure it's saved me thousands of dollars so far.

I am really like that too, I think maybe SOME of this needing a better card comes from the guys who JUST MUST HAVE the best BENCH SCORES...

 

[Anteaus]

And first let me say that I myself am a PC gamer...

But do you start asking yourself "Am I crazy for wanting/needing to buy a new $350 GPU just so that I can play the newest game when the (game) looks and plays pretty darn good on a console that costs about the same as my video card alone?"

Do you ever begin to question your ROI?

I mean when you look at games like Borderlands you realize that TOP END graphics are NOT a requirement for a game to be fun. Would Dragon Age: Inquisition be any LESS fun with Borderland style graphics...?

And I KNOW you can do so much more than play games on your PC but do you think there might be a MIDDLE GROUND device at a price point between the CONSOLE ($395) and a nice gaming rig ($1300) some day?

If they would come out with a quality, reliable mouse and game pad (WSAD, Run, Jump keys) for consoles, I would be VERY tempted...

I don't know, I just feel there comes a point where FPS and shadows begin...over shadowing...the FUN of gaming.

Hope to hear your thoughts...

Thanks!

It's about value. That $350 video card you are describing is 2 to 3 times more powerful than what is in current gen consoles. Consoles tend to designed around hardware tech that is already 2+ years old at release. If you build a PC based on current console spec, it can generally be built for less than the price of the console (ignoring software licenses). PC gamers do pay more, but they live in a world where the average gaming computer is much more powerful than console, and therefore enjoy tech benefits that console gamers dream about, like 4K gaming resolutions. I have been gaming at full 1080P 60FPS since circa 2007. I built a machine for the price of 2 PS3s but I would argue that my gaming experience was consistently superior.

I find the resolution debate between the PS4 and XB1 to be ridiculous, because both systems are trash compared to even a moderately powerful PC gaming system today. Consoles have their uses and I own one, but it certainly isn't because of its hardware. There are certain types of games that tend to work better on consoles, therefore I play them on one.

That said, developers like Ubisoft are giving PC gaming a bad rap because they release under optimized games that run badly even on PCs. By normalizing performance, they put off an incorrect impression that current gen consoles perform similarly.

Think about it this way. The average PC gamer will probably spend 2 to 2.5 as much on hardware as a console gamer over a given period of time; however, the PC gamer will consistently have a large performance advantage that increases as a console gen ages as well as having a computer that can do many other things in the mean time.

 

[tential]

So are you saying I could play DA:I on my current PC?

Seems like you missed the entire point of my post.

Yes, you could though. Turn down some settings and play. You don't have to play at 1080p, 2xMSAA, ULTRA settings.

 

[TheSlamma]

But do you start asking yourself "Am I crazy for wanting/needing to buy a new $350 GPU just so that I can play the newest game when the (game) looks and plays pretty darn good on a console that costs about the same as my video card alone?"

My PC started out with a Radeon 5850 and now has a Geforce 670 and plays everything I want without any problems. Neither was close to $350 and my entire PC was never close to $1300. I think you are not spending your money well.

 

[Anomaly1964]

Seems like you missed the entire point of my post.

Yes, you could though. Turn down some settings and play. You don't have to play at 1080p, 2xMSAA, ULTRA settings.

No, I got the cost comparison too...

THanks!

 

[Anomaly1964]

Add on question: Would running DUAL (SLI) 570s in my machine change my GPU power in game setting?

I know this is a basic question but I have never used SLI...

 

[TheSlamma]

I am really like that too, I think maybe SOME of this needing a better card comes from the guys who JUST MUST HAVE the best BENCH SCORES...

So why even list them? Benchmarking is a different hobby than a PC gamer

Normal PC gamers are probably on a 2-4 year cycle average for GPU's

 

[BSim500]

Would Dragon Age: Inquisition be any LESS fun with Borderland style graphics...?

Personally I'm not interested in DAI (ironically, more due to the gameplay than GFX). DAO was epic despite its GFX (as were predecessors NWN & Baldur's Gate series). Different genre's also have different "expectation of priorities". Eg, many expect modern FPS & 3rd person "action adventure" to have decent GFX but happily put up with sh*tty / badly ported game controls. But even then if an FPS game is based on a specific art-style and is obviously intended to not have top GFX, people will stop comparing it to Crysis and enjoy it for the gameplay (Borderlands, Bioshock, Dishonored, Portal, Torchlight, etc). Point & click adventure games have a far lower expectation of GFX but a higher expectation of "decent original plot". RPG's, racing games, flight sims & puzzle games will often be "made or broken" on game-mechanics regardless of bleeding edge GFX, etc.

And I KNOW you can do so much more than play games on your PC but do you think there might be a MIDDLE GROUND device at a price point between the CONSOLE ($395) and a nice gaming rig ($1300) some day?

I think there already is. Buy a low-mid card like a 750Ti / 7850 then turn GFX settings down to Medium, and you've pretty much got a "console" equivalent PC for very little cost. For more grunt, go for a mid-range GTX 760 (or upcoming GTX 960 next year) class (and AMD equivalents) and use Medium / High. Just because games are by default benchmarked at "Ultra, everything maxed" or some enthusiast sites starts pushing 1440p / 4k gaming doesn't mean that has to be your personal default. I believe things only turn into a "number chasing rat race" when people start worrying what others think of them running any game at less than Ultra, rather than test how a game actually feels at lower settings on their own rig (half the time I can't see much difference between Ultra vs High).

I don't know, I just feel there comes a point where FPS and shadows begin...over shadowing...the FUN of gaming.

I know what you're getting at (and agree to a large extent), but for me there are several overlapping reasons for that. Sometimes when an AAA title / franchise takes itself too seriously it can lose a certain amount of "fun-ness" (as it can when it gets "sequelled to death"). Consolization / bad ports for me tend to ruin the fun-factor far more than anything else (because you can turn GFX settings down but you can't always fix broken mouse input or ugly "designed for TV" HUD's). Personally, I'd happily sacrifice GFX fidelity just for them to get the damn keyb & mouse controls working properly on a lot of recent half-broken badly ported "PC" games.

However I wouldn't swap a PC for a console purely for the modability / fan missions, etc. Not to mention lack of choice of many non-AAA titles. There are some true gems out there which aren't available on any console (Divinity Original Sin, etc). Other PC games also just don't have the same "tone" or "feel" to them on a TV. Eg, the Thief series are the kind of games you play up close to a decent monitor, with decent headphones & at night with the lights off. Likewise, with fast paced "twitch arena" games like Quake / Doom - neither of these would feel the same from 8ft away "slouching on a couch" staring at a TV vs "leaning into" the action on a PC regardless of cost. Some games just feel more naturally immersive to sit up close to.

 

[tential]

Add on question: Would running DUAL (SLI) 570s in my machine change my GPU power in game setting?

I know this is a basic question but I have never used SLI...

It wouldn't be worth it to upgrade to SLI 570s.
VRAM is way too low. I'd play at lower settings or upgrade.

TBH though, if you don't want to be on cutting edge, just don't play the newest games. But that's up to you. I generally don't play games until 1+ years after they're out (Patched up, maybe some good mods, and I can run it at max settings with whatever new GPU is out).

 

[Bateluer]

How do you figure that?

Older games on a console tend to be more expensive. I just picked up Tomb Raider (2013) for US $3 on Amazon. Consoles are still US$20.

Even now the PC version is $10 cheaper than the PS3 version and $8 cheaper than the Xbox360 version.

Don't forget about the cost of XBL and/or PSN. That adds up quickly.