Zero Punctuation: Exclusives Showdown

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 

2 reasons I've decided to (eventually) switch to Playstation for this current generation:
1) Xbox One upscales to 1080p. PS4 displays 1080p natively. How is it even possible to not run 1080p in 2013? Hell, 1080p is a lower resolution these days! Lots of PCs are running 1440p.
2) Xbox One's exclusives are (mostly) also PC releases. Playstation exclusives are almost never released on other platforms.

That being said, I don't plan to buy either console until their prices drop significantly. I'm perfectly happy remaining among the elite ranks of the PC master race.

GoddyofAus:
This PC master race stuff has really stopped being funny and has begun looking like crass bitterness.

I agree that PC master race stuff has stopped being a joke and became a sad reality with the new console launch.

Aardvaarkman:

I don't think that's significant evidence on its own of a growing PC game market. The growth in Steam users could possibly be accounted for gamers who previously bought boxed games at retail switching to Steam for the convenience and price savings. It doesn't necessarily reflect overall growth of the market.

Part of it could also be accounted for by Steam adding support for the Mac and Linux platforms - which have historically not been as well-served in gaming as Windows was. And yes, I know that Mac OS and Linux technically also run on "PCs" in the general term of "Personal Computer" - but "PC" in the gaming context typically refers to Windows specifically.

Thanks to the other people who have made similar replies on this topic - I don't have time to reply to you all individually, and I hope this post addresses your points. I really don't think we have adequate data on PC gaming to determine if game sales as a whole are following the overall trend of PC sales. But lacking better data, I think we can see what the broad trends are, and at the moment it is not trending away from consoles and mobile devices.

That article is bad, it 65 million active users, that means they log on at least once a week, that goes for all, even the consoles.

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/games/news/steam-hits-65-million-active-user-milestone-passes-xbox-live-network-439919

Hey did anyone else watch the Console War - The musical?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_xHueP7bQ0

I guess Xbone's lost should've been expected from the start of this vid. After all, Yahtzee hates children but MJ is hot.

Also, does this mean Minecraft is 4th GOTY of 2011?

exobook:
You forgot the 4th way, the WiiU!

The WiiU is the 4th door that is actually not to another room but simply walking out the exit and quieting blogging on the internet that your still inside the building.

wombat_of_war:

Evonisia:
I liked those lovely transitions, and some of the jokes (like the Killzone Heilgast one brought up in XP). But this just feels like a lazy E3 video to the point where Ryse is almost summarised exactly as it was in the E3 video and Dead Rising 3 has the exact same summary as the E3 video. It also just felt like smug PC supremacy which you could find in abundance (to put it charitably) in the forums, especially because the 7th Gen was completely forgotten in the description of "good games".

I wonder whether any of these games will be given a full review.

*dismissive hand way* its only smug if you ignore facts

C.S.Strowbridge:
Frankly I think he was too kind to the XBox One. Ryse is loaded with micro-transactions, so fuck it. In my mind, it's a clean sweep for PS4.

Keep in mind, I'm not planning on buying any.

what sort of microtransactions?

Ryse makes you buy the usual multiplayer microtransactions, and pay for level up bonuses you unlock in single player by playing, and no you cannot become max level in one run.

I don't usually comment on ZP threads, partly because I'm almost certain Yahtzee doesn't read them, but I thought I'd drop in to suggest and request with equal urgency that, Yahtzee, please never sing again. It gives your video a certain "smugly oblivious sixth-former with a YouTube account" quality, and while I'm having trouble articulating exactly what that is, rest assured it's not a good thing.

Aardvaarkman:

Gorrath:
Given that PCs are used for far more than gaming, your comparison there is hogwash. PC sales have declined because many people who used pcs for light apps like social networking can now do so much more readily on mobile devices. People are buying more PCs than ever, it's just that many of those "PCs" are in the form of a "phone" or "tablet". With the massive boom in PC game sales, which is the actual metric we would use to track pc gaming growth or decline, it can hardly be said that pc gaming is declining.

Speaking of hogwash - a tablet or a phone is not what people are referring to when they say "PC" - especially in the context of gaming. We're talking about desktop and laptop PCs here - and that's what the industry statistics are referring to.

The simple fact is that the phones and tablets do not run the games that people are talking about when referring to gaming and the "PC Master Race." Do you really believe that the people here proclaiming the superiority of the PC as a gaming platform are referring to Android or iOS devices?

I'm baffled as to why you think I was saying that PC gaming = andorid/IOS games. Your point was that the drop in total PC sales is somehow an indicator of the popularity of PC gaming. My point was that this claim is deeply flawed, not because the people moving from PCs to android/iOS are still to be considered PC gamers, but because they were never PC gamers in the first place (in the context of PC gaming we are talking about). How does a bunch of non-pc gamers moving from PCs to mobile devices demonstrate a drop in the popularity of PC gaming? The fact that people are playing farmville or bejeweled on their phone instead of a PC is not at all a commentary on PC gaming.

A much better way to determine the health of PC gaming is to look at PC gaming retailers and see how much business they are doing (Vavle, GoG, ect.) The latest numbers suggest "astonishingly well".

EDIT: I got a chance to read some more of your replies to others and see that you've addressed a few more things that I'd like to comment on. On your point that kids are growing up with tablets and phones and so may stick with those platforms instead of migrating to apps that are more robust, I'd say we'll have to sit and wait, but I don't think that'll be the case. I see no reason to believe that people growing up with gaming will simply stick with those platforms, unless those platforms themselves become much more powerful (and they may). But if/when we can play Rome 2 on a tablet, I think we'll be past the necessity of splitting those gamers up between "PC gamers" and "mobile users" as the devices will be one and the same.

As for the bump in steam users simply being an incorporation of Mac/Linux users and physical media types switching over to digital distribution, that does certainly account for some of that, but I'd wager that the great sea of people who did buy PC games as physical media with any regularity made that switch long ago and that Linux users do not constitute a significant population to cause such an upsurge. Mac users may account for some, but by and large heavy PC gamers mostly bought PCs for that purpose and shied away from Mac and Linux because of the lack of overall support in games for those platforms.

In any case, gaming on every front has been a business that has gone up and up over the last two decades and is bigger now than ever. I am not in agreement with those that say that consoles are dying nor do I buy into any elitism when it comes to hobby choices, even though I do think PC is the best platform currently available for gaming.

Well, I have to say I was pretty let down by this episode. Doing a comparison video based on games that in most cases we haven't even seen a demo of is just a tad ridiculous.

If, and I stress if, Sony squeeze out another half-way decent Wipeout game I'll consider buying a PS4, as it is my money is far better spent buying the excessively DLC for games like Crusader Kings II whereby I actually know that my money is ultimately going to a developer who has continued and will continue to release new content gratis as well as patch bugs and continually upgrade the game for the past few years.

I see the appeal that consoles may have, assuming I'm seeing the same appeal that other people are seeing (apparent ease of use... and a warranty?), but it really doesn't do it for me. PC gaming doesn't need to "win" or "take over", it already has won and taken over but some of the major publishers/developers who dump millions (billions?) into the gaming industry a year have missed the boat completely. Hence the continuing strife.

Gorrath:
My point was that this claim is deeply flawed, not because the people moving from PCs to android/iOS are still to be considered PC gamers, but because they were never PC gamers in the first place (in the context of PC gaming we are talking about). How does a bunch of non-pc gamers moving from PCs to mobile devices demonstrate a drop in the popularity of PC gaming?

Where's your evidence that none of them were "real" PC gamers? There are plenty of ex-PC gamers (no, not Farmville, etc) - who have moved to consoles and mobile.

As for the bump in steam users simply being an incorporation of Mac/Linux users and physical media types switching over to digital distribution, that does certainly account for some of that, but I'd wager that the great sea of people who did buy PC games as physical media with any regularity made that switch long ago...

Perhaps, but do we have any figures on how much gamers are spending on Steam compared to where they were previously, and what the profit margins are? A higher number of users doesn't necessarily mean a bigger industry if there's not as much income. I think you'll agree that many people joined Steam because of the sales and cheap prices.

In any case, gaming on every front has been a business that has gone up and up over the last two decades and is bigger now than ever. I am not in agreement with those that say that consoles are dying nor do I buy into any elitism when it comes to hobby choices, even though I do think PC is the best platform currently available for gaming.

Now, that's the truth.

I'm glad the PS4 won, so that's good.

In the land of the blind...

Sending big-name titles (new IPs, no less) away for a few months knocks off a point in my book for PS4, and I don't care much for advancing Spunkgargleweewee to Ancient Rome is worth wanting Ryse (though MovieBob Chipman might agree with Yahtzee for that advancement). Those balance out, I guess.

But wait! PS4 has PS Plus, which will make several good games the price of 1 new game next year! That's 10 points that crushes the XbOne and overshadows the gleeful chorus emanating from Super Mario 3D World and its disciples. Hopefully, that's next review so that the Wii U can get its fair share of interest on this site.

Batou667:
I don't usually comment on ZP threads, partly because I'm almost certain Yahtzee doesn't read them

It's true, he's doesn't read them.

He says so right here: http://youtu.be/-WTD35UOBJo?t=6m35s

Actual quote from him: "I tend not read my comments at all these days."

Yes for a cross platform title, where it is ported to each platform with some bare minimum of competence, the best *potential* PC gaming experience - just in terms of modability and graphics - is far superior to the optimal experience of any console. It may even be true - and it is for some games - to say that of the *average or better* PC experience. As a long time PC gamer who has owned several consoles, including the PS3 and Xbox 360 most recently, I have to emphasize that as only being true across a subset of the range of experiences. This is not just because there is more variability in PC hardware capability and so the optimal experience on a given setup can be significantly different from the best possible experience, but also because the actual experience on a given setup is sometimes far from what should be optimal.

This is particularly true for any gamer who has a PC they would tentatively call mid-range in terms of performance capabilities (for reference my $600 heavily discounted Core i7 3770k with Radeon 7770 would fall into this category due to the middling radeon 7770.) It is here where users may find they are able to run some new games at maximum or near maximum settings flawlessly while the default settings of a few games yields terrible slide-show performance. More often than not having the power to run it at the resolution they want and acheive the visual fidelity they expect appropriate to their system's capabilities, this is a matter of features being used being ill-supoprted by or espescially taxing on their hardware. It is then that tweaking settings, sometimes using Nvidia or ATI tools or editing INI files, becomes the price of getting the experience that your system is capable of. Users who can not be bothered must settle for either lower fidelity than their systems can reasonably produce or worse performance. That there is no "mid-range" of performance or feature sets (or DX feature levels) to run afoul of inappropriate default/automatic settings for console users to have to worry about can not be understated. That a console gamer can *generally* be assured that they are having the optimal experience in this sense should not be undersold - even if a game is crap at least a on a console you know that it's probably just as crap for everyone else as it is for you.

For me, I don't mind the tinkering and actually kind of enjoy figuring things out in cases where games (Skyrim on my system at launch for example) run far worse than they should. At the same time I know the possible frustration well enough (Skyrim 4 days after launch on my system at the time for example) that I can't really see judging someone for how they weigh the costs and benefits in this matter. So I don't think one can flatly hand it to PC gaming based on performance and presentation. I'd say that in that regard it's really a matter of individual preferences and tradeoffs; often the choice seems obvious for the individual but neither the weights nor the apaprent obviousness of the balance should be presumed in any way universal.

I think the only unequivocal advantage that PC gaming provides is that it has some semblance of a competitive marketplace. I mean that you have a number of content delivery services vying for usershare; Battle-Net, Steam, Origin, Amazon, GoG.com, Desura, The Humble Store, U-Play, etc. Now anyone familiar with more than one of these services can immediately point out some of the flaws in this marketplace - most big titles are exclusive to either Steam of a publisher's own service like Origin or Battle-Net. Additionally, some services like the Humble Store or Amazon don't serve all or even most of the content themselves but once again rely on the publisher's services or Steam.

It's fair to say then that whatever competition there is, it's not as much over who can provide a specific game at the best price and with the best customer experience. None of the other services are competing with Blizzard to offer better prices and a better experience purchasing and downloading Diablo III obviously. In this way the PC marketplace is far from ideal, in terms of consumers being served by competition to the extent that one might imagine.

There are several real competitions going on though that do benefit PC gaming consumers quite a bit. Steam and Origin, and to a lesser extent services like Uplay's store, are in competition over the install base and engagement of their customers. While it may seem one sidedly going in Steam's favor, the emergence of publisher-owned content delivery networks has kept Steam on its toes and it strives to maintain hegemony by both keeping customers engaged and making itself valuable enough to other developers/publishers that they do not see creating their own services as worthwhile. At the same time, services like Origin actively strive to justify themselves in the face of Steam. While I still question the worth of the service in comparison to Steam, EA's commitment to it has prompted them to offer periodic significant sales and I believe was their impetus behind participating in a 100%-to-charity humble bundle (to attract users to Origin.)

A purer form of competition exists on the indie level where games will be offered simultaneously across multiple services and served by each of those content networks directly instead of as a voucher for Steam. GoG for example had gradually improved its accessibility to smaller indie titles and become quite a popular service-of-choice among Kickstarter backers. This in turn has driven Steam to make their service more attractive and accessible to quality indie titles, though whether or not the execution of such programs as Greenlight hit the mark is another topic for debate.

Piracy also plays a role here as content providers in the PC space are much more acutely aware that they are also in competition with the pirates. To some degree at least they almost all realize they have to offer something the pirates can't. While I think Blizzard and EA have made miscalculations in how they have dealt with this realization, Steam and GoG have not. They both realize that the best way to compete with pirates is to try to offer a better service and experience where possible - though GoG's view brings them to the conclusion of forswearing all DRM while the reality of Steam's dual service to both publishers and consumers requires more of a balancing act.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-10-24-newell-stop-piracy-by-offering-superior-service
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/126015-Good-Old-Games-Pirates-Are-Our-Competition-Not-Steam

I think why these sorts of competitions matter and are of as significant a boon to PC gamers as they are is because they are interchangeable in one way that services offered by/for specific consoles are not. While, even more so than consoles, games can be exclusive to one service the services are not exclusive to hardware. That is to say that Steam has to care about users spending time, money, and attention on other services because there is no hardware-purchase barrier to them doing so. They might not be competing with many of the same products, but they are competing over the same wallets and there's nothing to stop most of those users from spending it wherever they want besides grabbing their attention and offering them a reason to spend it with your service first.

Hopefully what Sony is doing with Amazon in terms of allowing them into their ecosystem may produce at least the same sort of imperfect and incomplete competition which benefits PC gamers. Sure PC Gamers like me will lose the one true advantage I think our platform of choice has, but I'd trade any imagined bragging rights over one more platform where the market works slightly better for consumers than it does now. Besides it's not like the market works perfectly in the PC gaming realm, so anything that makes Steam and various PC services feel like they have to improve even a little bit more would be welcomed.

Jman1236:
Not to flame but if you think about it, PC is more expensive since you have to upgrade individual hardware pieces every 6 months or so just to play the latest games and there's no grantee that they will run because a program you have in the background or your current hardware configuration will not get along with the game.

This is why I mostly stick to console gaming, since you only have to take out a loan every 5-7 years.

Erm, if you have to upgrade your rig every six months, you either are getting seriously conned, have some obsession that you should probably talk to a psychiatrist about, or have a hazardously large hardon for bleeding edge tech.

As a rule of thumb, a rig build from scratch for around $650 should last *at least* around 4 years before having to drop anything to "low" at 1920x1080, at which point about $200 can be spent to replace the video card with a new midrange card (or just get a duplicate of your old one for about $100, if you feel like using Crossfire or SLI). In the meantime, the cash saved by the PC being an open marketplace will have more than reimbursed your original investment.

LGC Pominator:
all of whom seem remarkably incapable of noticing the fact that they are just that, obsessives, people who define themselves more by their fucking choice in entertainment hardware than the actual things that they do in life, whilst at the same time possessing an air of victimisation by a society that bends over backwards to allow their preferred entertainment medium to be taken seriously

Yes, console gamers are truly chill and enlightened when they post big and massively ironic text wall rants about pc gamers. Because it's just obsessive fanboy behavior when the others are doing it, right? Are you just trolling or are you seriously not noticing what you are doing?

pumping 2500 into a computer every 6 months

Ah, okay. Trolling it is. Or did you fall into a TARDIS in the 70s where that hyperbole would've been slightly accurate? In that case, watch your mortgage around 2008.

Jman1236:
Not to flame but if you think about it, PC is more expensive since you have to upgrade individual hardware pieces every 6 months.

Uh huh. And your console is visited by a magical moon fairy to regularly improve the 5-year-old hardware that was already bottom-shelf when it was new? Yeah, digging out that worn-out blatant lie is certainly not you trolling, bro.

Jacob Wisner:
Yes for a cross platform title, where it is ported to each platform with some bare minimum of competence, the best *potential* PC gaming experience - just in terms of modability and graphics - is far superior to the optimal experience of any console. It may even be true - and it is for some games - to say that of the *average or better* PC experience. As a long time PC gamer who has owned several consoles, including the PS3 and Xbox 360 most recently, I have to emphasize that as only being true across a subset of the range of experiences. This is not just because there is more variability in PC hardware capability and so the optimal experience on a given setup can be significantly different from the best possible experience, but also because the actual experience on a given setup is sometimes far from what should be optimal.
Snip.

This was a very well thought out and explained assessment, kudos!

I'd say that the main advantage that consoles have is that they -are- more accessible than PC gaming, since everything's laid out very simply (I've even met people with good gaming cards who've never even heard of Steam), and it's pretty much nearly impossible to screw yourself over by doing something out of naivete/stupidity (like those poor bastards who downloaded 8 gigs of malware thinking it was the PC version of GTA 5).
And I do hope that Sony's move with Amazon marks the beginning of a trend. After all, honest competition is good for everyone (look at GPU prices since AMD started turning up the heat in October!).

What bugs me about the perception of PC gaming (and one of many good reasons why the people who use the term "PC Gaming Master Race" need to shut the hell up), is that many people will post about how expensive setting up a gaming rig is using a desktop packing an i5 and in excess of 8 gigs of DDR3. They're a dedicated video card away from a very solid gaming rig! If one with a somewhat flimsy case.
Got a desktop bought within the last 4 years or so? Slap in a 7850 and go for it!

PS: I'd say that for a ~$600 build, I'd advise getting an AMD CPU to make room in the budget for a 7870 (Or R9 270X if you prefer), pretty much any CPU since the Phenom II won't be a bottleneck unless you go start going high-end.

LazyAza:
Love how you listed three incredibly bland shooters none of which have anything new or interesting to offer to the genre and thus serve only to prove my point of why buying a console day 1 is silly.

I'm well aware of all the business nonsense behind things needing to sell well upfront but that still doesn't stop the whole situation from being incredibly stupid. At least with the PS3 and 360 their were some ok games that did something new and different, janky and broken many were, but at least they were trying.

This gen its been a whole launch of nothing but bland this and pointless sequel that. And no downloadable games don't count, big budget games are what matter with a console launch and both of them this gen failed to be compelling in that regard and from the looks of the release schedule will continue to be for a while still.

Well, that's like, your opinion man. I'm still having a blast with the games that I have for the system. You may think that the shooters I listed are bland, but Battlefield 4 is one of the most fun multiplayer games I've played in ages. Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't say that the games available at launch were pointless.

Wow what's all this love for PC's from commentators, all of a sudden. It's really nice that people like Yahtzee are waking up to....

image

Oh, yeah I forgot...

If only it was actually affordable to buy a competent gaming PC. Coming as somebody with no existing hardware at all (would need case, PSU, all peripherals, OS and monitor), it comes to something like $1700-$1800nzd for me to buy a new machine. Now making the assumption that you upgrade it for like $400 every 3-4 years, that's going to push it up to about $2000 for a 6-8 year cycle or gaming. Simply put, that's a really hard sale proposition for someone like me. I have a 4 year old laptop that can already play most 2D stuff and older games, so all that expense would basically be just to get onto some of the higher end PC games (e.g. Planetside, Star Citizen) and to me it simply isn't worth it. Those $2000 can easily cover 2 new consoles and a pile of games, especially if I wait a year or so to get them.

Spud of Doom:
If only it was actually affordable to buy a competent gaming PC. Coming as somebody with no existing hardware at all (would need case, PSU, all peripherals, OS and monitor), it comes to something like $1700-$1800nzd for me to buy a new machine. Now making the assumption that you upgrade it for like $400 every 3-4 years, that's going to push it up to about $2000 for a 6-8 year cycle or gaming. Simply put, that's a really hard sale proposition for someone like me. I have a 4 year old laptop that can already play most 2D stuff and older games, so all that expense would basically be just to get onto some of the higher end PC games (e.g. Planetside, Star Citizen) and to me it simply isn't worth it. Those $2000 can easily cover 2 new consoles and a pile of games, especially if I wait a year or so to get them.

Are prices really inflated in NZ? Or you're confusing a competent gaming PC with a pointlessly overpowered one :P
I've got a 550 euro machine here I built last night that's running Rome 2 on extreme with 45 stable FPS.
PC gaming is quite a lot cheaper here than console over a longer period, firstly because console prices are a bit inflated and PC parts are not (though they are about to increase VAT on both:( ), and secondly because of big difference in game prices. PC titles get discounted pretty damn fast these days and console titles stay at full price for a very long time.

We calculated my friend's 360 game collection and when you remove the handful of exclusives from the equation we figure he payed almost 1500e more for games than he would've on PC, over the period of 8 years or so. That's enough for 2 great gaming PCs that would easily last 4 years each.

I get that a lot of this is very region dependent, some places have a big used games market for consoles that evens things up somewhat and some have just different pricing on different stuff.

Anaphyis:

LGC Pominator:
all of whom seem remarkably incapable of noticing the fact that they are just that, obsessives, people who define themselves more by their fucking choice in entertainment hardware than the actual things that they do in life, whilst at the same time possessing an air of victimisation by a society that bends over backwards to allow their preferred entertainment medium to be taken seriously

Yes, console gamers are truly chill and enlightened when they post big and massively ironic text wall rants about pc gamers. Because it's just obsessive fanboy behavior when the others are doing it, right? Are you just trolling or are you seriously not noticing what you are doing?

pumping 2500 into a computer every 6 months

Ah, okay. Trolling it is. Or did you fall into a TARDIS in the 70s where that hyperbole would've been slightly accurate? In that case, watch your mortgage around 2008.

Clearly my comment was misconstrued as an attack, which it was intended to be far from that, being, in part, a response to a massive amount of frustration with personal attacks that have been going on both here and elsewhere online over this whole PC vs Console issue.

I wasn't trying to claim that console gamers are in any way better than PC gamers, if for no other reason than I don't even categorise myself as either a console or a PC gamer, merely someone who plays and enjoys video games, the "rant" as you described it was less of an attack on the specific side that favours PC gaming, rather an expression of a building frustration with a very toxic and intolerant part of the gaming community that has become very prevalent online, having been exposed to a variety of absolutely abhorrent discussions and commentary that can only really be described as bullying of people whose "sin" was to ask about the best way to get good performance out of their GPU for one particular game, and then proceeding to get themselves attacked due to the apparently outdated and "useless" nature of their GPU... which was released in 2012, a whole year more in date than the GPU that I have recently installed in my machine.

Beyond that, I will apologise for the hyperbolic nature of the pricing definition, it was certainly innacurate, though it simply came as a result of an attempt to embellish a point that was clearly lost on the folks here, which I strongly regret, though I do not appreciate being called a troll for expressing a viewpoint.

I hope that this may work towards smoothing over some of the upset my comment seemed to have spawned, that was certainly not my intention, I was merely trying to make an honest criticism of an attitude that seems to be hurting gaming more and more these days, I do love gaming, and it is something I do in a lot of my spare time, I just feel that to a disproportionate amount of our community it is starting to come at the cost of having a healthy life outside of our "gaming lives" and when this devolves into personal attacks based on the fact that people want to do other things than just play video games (I have literally been called out as "not being really one of us" for going to the gym and clubs here before), there is no ill intent in my commentary, simply interest in mutual personal growth.

Church185:

LazyAza:
Love how you listed three incredibly bland shooters none of which have anything new or interesting to offer to the genre and thus serve only to prove my point of why buying a console day 1 is silly.

I'm well aware of all the business nonsense behind things needing to sell well upfront but that still doesn't stop the whole situation from being incredibly stupid. At least with the PS3 and 360 their were some ok games that did something new and different, janky and broken many were, but at least they were trying.

This gen its been a whole launch of nothing but bland this and pointless sequel that. And no downloadable games don't count, big budget games are what matter with a console launch and both of them this gen failed to be compelling in that regard and from the looks of the release schedule will continue to be for a while still.

Well, that's like, your opinion man. I'm still having a blast with the games that I have for the system. You may think that the shooters I listed are bland, but Battlefield 4 is one of the most fun multiplayer games I've played in ages. Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't say that the games available at launch were pointless.

Battlefield 4 is a PC game as well. And it's better on PC to boot so it doesn't really count either. Right now their are no exclusives on PS4 or One I'd buy either system for. I don't really want a One regardless but I'm sure a PS4 will be nice to have once Naughtydog or Insomniac release something cool for it.

Anaphyis:

LGC Pominator:

pumping 2500 into a computer every 6 months

Ah, okay. Trolling it is. Or did you fall into a TARDIS in the 70s where that hyperbole would've been slightly accurate? In that case, watch your mortgage around 2008.

How is that trolling?

Hyperbole is by definition inaccurate.

Anaphyis:

Jman1236:
Not to flame but if you think about it, PC is more expensive since you have to upgrade individual hardware pieces every 6 months.

Uh huh. And your console is visited by a magical moon fairy to regularly improve the 5-year-old hardware that was already bottom-shelf when it was new? Yeah, digging out that worn-out blatant lie is certainly not you trolling, bro.

If you don't keep a PC up with improving technology, games will studder and run badly in general. This is not true for consoles. Because they are completely devoted to their purpose (or at least they used to be), they don't require the same specifications to run games that look graphically comparable to PC's while running smoothly for the length of the console's lifetime. That's why tech faeries aren't required. I don't see how moon faeries would help, but I will say that unnecessary and hyperbolic insults come dangerously close to trolling.

LazyAza:
Battlefield 4 is a PC game as well. And it's better on PC to boot so it doesn't really count either. Right now their are no exclusives on PS4 or One I'd buy either system for. I don't really want a One regardless but I'm sure a PS4 will be nice to have once Naughtydog or Insomniac release something cool for it.

The gap between the console Battlefield and PC Battlefield isn't nearly as drastic as it was last gen (Battlefield 4 looks like a PS2 game on 360). I would have to spend much more than $460 to get my PC running Battlefield to the point that I would notice a difference. On top of that, I have way more more friends that would rather play it on console. You may argue superiority all you want, but it's not going to diminish my experience.

I respect that there isn't anything you would like to play on it yet, especially if you already own a powerful PC. But, to a person in my position, trying to talk others out of something they want just sounds like arrogance. Don't add to PC gamers having a bad name.

EDIT: This is my final word on the issue. Debating between platforms is pointless, PC is more powerful, but I think preference is more important. The gaming community as a whole needs to quit shaming each other for what they enjoy. I won't respond to any replies.

Zac Jovanovic:

Spud of Doom:
If only it was actually affordable to buy a competent gaming PC. Coming as somebody with no existing hardware at all (would need case, PSU, all peripherals, OS and monitor), it comes to something like $1700-$1800nzd for me to buy a new machine. Now making the assumption that you upgrade it for like $400 every 3-4 years, that's going to push it up to about $2000 for a 6-8 year cycle or gaming. Simply put, that's a really hard sale proposition for someone like me. I have a 4 year old laptop that can already play most 2D stuff and older games, so all that expense would basically be just to get onto some of the higher end PC games (e.g. Planetside, Star Citizen) and to me it simply isn't worth it. Those $2000 can easily cover 2 new consoles and a pile of games, especially if I wait a year or so to get them.

Are prices really inflated in NZ? Or you're confusing a competent gaming PC with a pointlessly overpowered one :P
I've got a 550 euro machine here I built last night that's running Rome 2 on extreme with 45 stable FPS.
PC gaming is quite a lot cheaper here than console over a longer period, firstly because console prices are a bit inflated and PC parts are not (though they are about to increase VAT on both:( ), and secondly because of big difference in game prices. PC titles get discounted pretty damn fast these days and console titles stay at full price for a very long time.

We calculated my friend's 360 game collection and when you remove the handful of exclusives from the equation we figure he payed almost 1500e more for games than he would've on PC, over the period of 8 years or so. That's enough for 2 great gaming PCs that would easily last 4 years each.

I get that a lot of this is very region dependent, some places have a big used games market for consoles that evens things up somewhat and some have just different pricing on different stuff.

The prices for PC hardware here are on average about 30% higher than they would be in USA, after considering conversion rates. I'm not sure how it compares to EU, since I haven't really checked. One major factor is the cost of monitors and inputs, which end up being about 20% of the cost on their own ($300-350, roughly), and another $100 for the OS. The price I quote above is for building a PC with an i5 (3rd or 4th gen, non-overclock) and a GTX770 or R9 280X. A mid-high PC, but nothing crazy. If anything, our console prices are inflated less than PC parts here this time around. Although that wasn't the case early last gen.

The game pricing thing is pretty arguable, since I never buy my games on release. Console games are usually below half price within like 6-12 months of release, at which point I start considering them. The difference really is not as big as people seem to think it is. In fact for major releases by big publishers it is almost always cheaper for me to buy a physical console import shipped from the UK than it is to spend $90usd for the latest COD game on steam or something.

Absolutely spot on about Forza 5. I was a huge fan of the series...then XBOX made their announcements about the One and I was like, "I dunno..." Then I read about how much less 5 has compared to 4 and I said, "well, I'll definitely not be buying an XBOX now. Thanks for taking the decision out of my hands, Microsoft & Turn 10."

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here