Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
That is assuming you have a good system to start with. What about those low-end PCs (especially those without AGP/PCI-E slots) and laptops which most people use? Sorry, SOL.
And what about the people who were smart enough to build their own systems or at least buy one that can be upgraded? If you've got a little discount box, sure, you might be better off buying a console than trying to upgrade your entire PC to play games. But, if you have a PC with some power under the hood, its easy to convert it into a gaming machine in most instances. That ease-of-conversion has been the foundation upon which PC gaming was built years ago. PCs have never really been built for gaming, but they can do it anyway. They can do just about anything.
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Not to mention you have the issue of drivers, certain games have rendering problems on one card vs another, to get 5.1 sound you need a decent soundcard (if you want EAX etc more specifically), and the fact that there are more games released for consoles each month than a the PC gets in a quarter. They may not all be good games, but the selection is much better for new titles. The added bonus being you know the game will work out of the box with a console.
1). Sorry, the driver issue ceased being a major problem with PCs some time ago. I haven't played every recent PC game on the market, but everything I tried on my old machine's 6800NU ran flawlessly. In fact, does anything really have problems on post-5800/5900 Nvidia hardware? I know there's a fog rendering issue in Half-Life 2 when using a 2900XT, but hopefully AMD will patch that out soon (if they haven't already).
2). My motherboard supports 7.1 channel sound out-of-the-box. If I wanted EAX support, which I generally don't, I could get a cheap Creative card for that.
3). Consoles and PCs all get some bad games, but all I ever really need is 1-2 good games per year from either one to be happy. I tend to go through console games much more quickly though. Reminds me of when I got Castlevania 2 years ago and beat it in about two days. Good thing it was my parents' money and not mine . . .
Originally posted by: Trevante
Get with the times man, even MS is making profit on their consoles now. Only Sony is still losing because they filled the PS3 with too much extra crap.
This must be a recent development. At launch, MS was losing money selling 360s.
Regardless, why should I care about how much money each company loses or makes? Do you care about the profit margins on PC hardware? I doubt you do. Being able to buy a console for less than what it actually costs to make is just another benefit IMO.
Huh? How do you figure? They don't sell those consoles to lose money. They plan to recover their investment somewhere down the line, such as by hooking their buyers on an online service that is generally required to play any of their games online or by selling games for maybe $5-$10 extra apiece.
They know people don't want to spend $800+ dollars on a gaming machine, especially if they have to as much work with it as you have to do with a PC.
Here's the deal, though . . . spend $800+ dollars on a PC, and you haven't got a gaming machine. You've got a PC.
Yes computers can be used for other things, we all know that, but as far as GAMING goes, the cost of PC gaming is still more than the cost of console gaming. Yes you could turn your PC into a gaming machine for $100-$500, but that PC wasn't exactly free was it?
So what? I put the PC together for reasons other than gaming. That's how PC gaming has always worked best; take what is essentially a multi-purpose office machine and turn it into a gaming machine with video cards and/or sound cards. In many cases, only a video card is now necessary, and that may be unnecessary soon enough for even mid-range PC gaming. Adding goodies like 7.1 speakers, widescreen monitors, etc adds additional costs that you will also be forced to pay adding the same hardware to your console.
Point is, I (and many others) will buy the PC regardless of whether or not I have a console. Anyone who buys a PC solely for gaming isn't using their PC to its fullest.
Part of the point is that if you want to be able to keep up with gaming on a PC, it's
more expensive to do so. 4 years ago, my P4 3ghz with 512MB RAM and a 9700 pro could run most games at 1280x1024 with max settings. Now I don't think I could even run today's games at medium settings at that resolution. In order to upgrade that, I'd need to at least upgrade the RAM and video card. But wait, my card is AGP and all the new cards are PCIe. So now I need to upgrade my mobo too. More $$$.
You are aware that both Nvidia and ATI are still releasing AGP parts, right?
Not saying console gaming is cheap, but 4 years ago, an Xbox cost about $300 (I don't remember when the price cuts actually were), and now an Xbox 360 can still be had for $300. Granted you need to pump a little extra into accessories for the core version (let's say $30 for a memory card at the least), but overall it's still cheaper on a console.
That sort of Ignores game markups and monthly fees for online gaming, doesn't it? Besides, if I'm already shelling out money on a PC regardless of whether or not I turn to PC games or consoles, PC gaming winds up being a lot cheaper. I'm gonna buy a PC regardless.
The one thing I like about console games is that as the consoles get older, the games usually look better, while maintaining the same hardware, as opposed to PC's, where last years top of the line video card becomes the minimum requirement and your 2 year old gfx card is only good for displaying your desktop.
The effect you observe is illusory. This is caused by companies like Sony releasing hardware that's so damn hard to program for that it takes developers years to finally master the platform. What you see now on the 360 is probably what you will get for the life of the platform.
I have no idea why you think "last year's top of the line video card" is now the minimum requirement. How many games out there require a 7950GX2 or a 1950XTX? Give me a break man. Look at what Valve did with Half-Life 2, giving you the option to play it in DX7, 8, or 9 mode. You can play that game on some old hardware and it still runs well. Don't knock PC gaming just because some developers like Bethesda release resource-hogging games that enjoyed more optimization for the console version. And I still was able to play that game with a 6800NU that was out-of-date by the time the game was released (and was never top-of-the-line).
I will reiterate: a PC (or a Mac) is a multi-faceted tool. If you buy it "just for games" you aren't using it to its full potential. Anyone in their right mind these days should have one whether or not they plan on playing PC games or console games. That is, unless the money isn't there, in which case other concerns before entertainment and computing come first.