PS4: $399, no online authentication, no used game restrictions...(Post E3 discussion)

///AMG said:
I dont think they lied. The never charged for multiplayer on ps3. However they are for ps4 and I am fine with that if they do dedicated servers and continue PS+ perks(I recently go PS+ during their march sale). Xbox Live multiplayer outside of cross game chat and party chat sucks balls. Its a constant lag fest these days and I only have Gold to play because I dont watch netflix etc. and its bs that they make you have gold for that too.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Sony danced around the question but they never promised they would not charge for MP on PS4...
 
XvMMvX said:
I am hoping this is the case for a lot of accessories. Like my $150 turtle beach wireless headset. Really don't want to have to buy another one.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping for that too.. I would like to use my wheel when GT7 eventually (whenever that may be) comes out.
 
About the $399 pricepoint

That is really close to a very decent gaming pc. At $400 someone with good research and sale price knowledge could land a really good rig with that budget. There is almost no reason to go to console gaming especially when they start charging for online gaming subscriptions and the like.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
About the $399 pricepoint

That is really close to a very decent gaming pc. At $400 someone with good research and sale price knowledge could land a really good rig with that budget. There is almost no reason to go to console gaming especially when they start charging for online gaming subscriptions and the like.
Click to expand...

An equivalent video card (between 7850-7870) is ~$200. Windows costs ~$100. You're going to get all the rest of the parts for $100?
 
Maximus825 said:
An equivalent video card (between 7850-7870) is ~$200. Windows costs ~$100. You're going to get all the rest of the parts for $100?
Click to expand...

Yeah can't everyone pickup an 8 core CPU, DDR5 motherboard, Blu Ray drive, and 8 GB DDR5 for $100? :p Also it will come with a promise that every game released for the next 5 to 7 years will play smoothly.

Everyone has spare cases and power supplies laying around, should be easy!
 
ocellaris said:
Yeah can't everyone pickup an 8 core CPU, DDR5 motherboard, Blu Ray drive, and 8 GB DDR5 for $100? :p Also it will come with a promise that every game released for the next 5 to 7 years will play smoothly.

Everyone has spare cases and power supplies laying around, should be easy!
Click to expand...

A console boasting an 8 core cpu with tons of ram isn't the same as someone saying they have that in their pc rig. In order to have every game released running "smoothly" they turn down graphics settings anyways. So all that hardware doesn't mean anything. There are also games that didn't run that well between the two systems (360 and ps3). So basically that promise is only good for "your console won't get a BSOD". But wait, wasn't there a slew of hardware failures the last generation?

And about the price of a gaming PC.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1l5FA


Yeah it won't be the best PC and you do need to add windows to that price but it will perform just as well as the next gen consoles when you consider that they don't ramp up the graphics on console games. So yeah anti aliasing might be off but it will be on consoles also. Also consider that these days having a PC in a house is a must so it takes care of that as well. And for blu ray? A blu ray drive costs 60 bucks online whenever you want to add one.

In addition, PC games rarely cost sixty bucks even on launch. And with the steam summer/winter sales most games are steals.




So overall? Considering everything? Even if you spent $700 on a gaming PC it would still be more cost effective.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
A console boasting an 8 core cpu with tons of ram isn't the same as someone saying they have that in their pc rig. In order to have every game released running "smoothly" they turn down graphics settings anyways. So all that hardware doesn't mean anything. There are also games that didn't run that well between the two systems (360 and ps3). So basically that promise is only good for "your console won't get a BSOD". But wait, wasn't there a slew of hardware failures the last generation?

And about the price of a gaming PC.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1l5FA


Yeah it won't be the best PC and you do need to add windows to that price but it will perform just as well as the next gen consoles when you consider that they don't ramp up the graphics on console games. So yeah anti aliasing might be off but it will be on consoles also. Also consider that these days having a PC in a house is a must so it takes care of that as well. And for blu ray? A blu ray drive costs 60 bucks online whenever you want to add one.

In addition, PC games rarely cost sixty bucks even on launch. And with the steam summer/winter sales most games are steals.




So overall? Considering everything? Even if you spent $700 on a gaming PC it would still be more cost effective.
Click to expand...

That GPU isn't as powerful, consoles have twice that much RAM, you left out the BD drive and you forgot Windows. Fixing all those things, you're around $800 with that build.
 
So what if someone on a PC turns down graphcis, at least they have the option, not possible often on crappy ports on consoles. Don't get started on the myth that console games are always optimized, I know plenty of people who plan to sit out the first year or so of this console generation because they expect that most games that ship will also co-ship on the older consoles and be really disappointing. And new ones will have way to much of a rush to make the release and also not be optimized. Happened last gen will happen again.


Second a PC is always a better value than the price tag implies at face value simply because it can do so much more and you probably need one anyway. Unless you are going to live off your smart phone you probably own a PC and now the difference between these consoles and the PC is only in the extra money you need to get capable graphics and maybe a BR drive. The BR drive is kinda a joke anyway, the type of people who are into console gaming don't care that much about IQ or they wouldn't own a console, and almost everything on a PC can be done without a BR drive so you don't even need it. I have 2 BR drives in my home and I can probably count on my 2 hands how many times I have used them in the past year. And if you fit the bill of being a major HT guy you surely already have a BR player if not a nice oppo or higher end one.
 
Maximus825 said:
That GPU isn't as powerful, consoles have twice that much RAM, you left out the BD drive and you forgot Windows. Fixing all those things, you're around $800 with that build.
Click to expand...

You obviously didn't read. The graphics are turned down on console games anyways. So they can name whatever component they want. They aren't going to run a game at Ultra settings.

With a PC you can add a Blu-ray drive later. And a windows PC is a necessary purchase these days anyways.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
You obviously didn't read. The graphics are turned down on console games anyways. So they can name whatever component they want. They aren't going to run a game at Ultra settings.

With a PC you can add a Blu-ray drive later. And a windows PC is a necessary purchase these days anyways.
Click to expand...

No, they do not "turn down" the graphics on a console. They squeeze every bit of power they can out of the systems. Do get equivalent graphics on a PC, you need even better hardware than what the console has.
 
By squeezing every bit of power you mean they turn down the graphics, that's why BF3 on the console has less than half the allowed players in a server right? Because its squeezing power lol.

Man wake up, like 2 games a year will actually do anything to optimize everybody else just turns off features till it works on all 3 consoles.
 
Maximus825 said:
No, they do not "turn down" the graphics on a console. They squeeze every bit of power they can out of the systems. Do get equivalent graphics on a PC, you need even better hardware than what the console has.
Click to expand...

So you are basically admitting that consoles are weak? I have an old 6870 and can max out 95% of games. The current consoles have come to the point where there are jagged lines everywhere. Heck even 6 year old games looked horrible. FEAR 1 looked horrible on the console ports.

Or console games are locked in at lower settings right out of the box.


Either way it looks bad and it does not justify a $400 price tag when you could get an equivalent, but in my opinion better, gaming machine which also doubles as a PC.
 
no shit consoles are weak it's suppose to be weak compared to top of the line pc shit because it's suppose to be AFFORDABLE and EASY to general mess
and guess what you get consoles for GAMES you want to play not for specs
 
PeeWeePee said:
no shit consoles are weak it's suppose to be weak compared to top of the line pc shit because it's suppose to be AFFORDABLE and EASY to general mess
and guess what you get consoles for GAMES you want to play not for specs
Click to expand...

Yes. But the argument is that consoles are getting so expensive that it is no longer cost effective. If you could get a better machine for the same price that also doubles as a PC why wouldn't you? And it's getting easier and easier by the minute to manage and build a PC. Parts are made less susceptible to static electricity. Parts are generally stronger and more user friendly nowadays.

So when the prices are about the same why not go for the technically better choice?
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
So you are basically admitting that consoles are weak? I have an old 6870 and can max out 95% of games. The current consoles have come to the point where there are jagged lines everywhere. Heck even 6 year old games looked horrible. FEAR 1 looked horrible on the console ports.

Or console games are locked in at lower settings right out of the box.


Either way it looks bad and it does not justify a $400 price tag when you could get an equivalent, but in my opinion better, gaming machine which also doubles as a PC.
Click to expand...

The current gen of consoles has 512MB RAM and GPUs from 2005. The 6870 came out at the end of 2010. So, yes, consoles would be weak compared to that.

Gilbert_pwns said:
Yes. But the argument is that consoles are getting so expensive that it is no longer cost effective. If you could get a better machine for the same price that also doubles as a PC why wouldn't you? And it's getting easier and easier by the minute to manage and build a PC. Parts are made less susceptible to static electricity. Parts are generally stronger and more user friendly nowadays.

So when the prices are about the same why not go for the technically better choice?
Click to expand...

The prices are not the same. An equivalent PC would be ~$800. Twice the price is not "about the same".
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
Yes. But the argument is that consoles are getting so expensive that it is no longer cost effective. If you could get a better machine for the same price that also doubles as a PC why wouldn't you? And it's getting easier and easier by the minute to manage and build a PC. Parts are made less susceptible to static electricity. Parts are generally stronger and more user friendly nowadays.

So when the prices are about the same why not go for the technically better choice?
Click to expand...

it's same reason apple product sells well
it works out of box and easy to use
most people don't want to deal with that shit
 
bazylik said:
Exactly, Sony danced around the question but they never promised they would not charge for MP on PS4...
Click to expand...

It was the fanboys that made that promise, in response to those who predicted (correctly) that PS+ would eventually gate off online multiplayer to those who didn't subscribe.
 
Maximus825 said:
The prices are not the same. An equivalent PC would be ~$800. Twice the price is not "about the same".
Click to expand...

But like I said before. Console games, for lack of performance or the use of lower settings by the developer, are going to use lower settings. So all the talk about 8 cores and multitudes of ram mean nothing if the games are going to be locked at 60 fps with no anti aliasing maxed and no other settings maxed. It might as well be a 400-500 dollar pc.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
But like I said before. Console games, for lack of performance or the use of lower settings by the developer, are going to use lower settings. So all the talk about 8 cores and multitudes of ram mean nothing if the games are going to be locked at 60 fps with no anti aliasing maxed and no other settings maxed. It might as well be a 400-500 dollar pc.
Click to expand...

You do realize that consoles and PC's attract two totally different market segments right? PC gamers are more the tinkering and higher performance types. Consoles gamers are like Bud Light drinkers, they don't care about specs or fiddling with things or really any thought at all, just plug and play, pop the top and drink. Comparing them is stupid.

Just because you could build a semi equivalent PC for around $600 doesn't mean people should or would do it. You think that's how the world works? If so people wouldn't be drinking so much shitty beer on a regular basis, or eating at McDonalds. They do.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
But like I said before. Console games, for lack of performance or the use of lower settings by the developer, are going to use lower settings. So all the talk about 8 cores and multitudes of ram mean nothing if the games are going to be locked at 60 fps with no anti aliasing maxed and no other settings maxed. It might as well be a 400-500 dollar pc.
Click to expand...

You're putting the effect before the cause there. The lower graphical settings are because that's what the hardware can could do. Not for shits and giggles. Developers are going to get every ounce of performance they can get out of the consoles, just as they have for every generation before this. The PS4 has 8GB RAM and a GPU between a 7850-7870. You'll need AT LEAST those specs to get a similar experience on a PC. And again, as proven by your own numbers, the PC would be around $800. TWICE the cost of a PS4.
 
Maximus825 said:
You're putting the effect before the cause there. The lower graphical settings are because that's what the hardware can could do. Not for shits and giggles. Developers are going to get every ounce of performance they can get out of the consoles, just as they have for every generation before this. The PS4 has 8GB RAM and a GPU between a 7850-7870. You'll need AT LEAST those specs to get a similar experience on a PC. And again, as proven by your own numbers, the PC would be around $800. TWICE the cost of a PS4.
Click to expand...

Again you are wrong. All those specs mean nothing because they use the hardware differently than a PC.

But let's talk about price.

A 7850 only costs 150 dollars. That's not gonna break the bank. 8gb? Before the price hike people were buying up ram like candy and even if you go by current prices 8gb is only 80 bucks or less.

So that is still 400-500 dollars worth of PC. And it is more cost effective EVEN if you spend $800 since people need PC's these days anyway.

Now let's talk about the specs.

Current games only use 4 cores right now. That may go up in the future but guess what? 8 cores can be bought for sub 200 dollars right now. And games rarely ever use the entirety of 4 gigs let alone 8 gb. Now that's on PC.

On consoles it's a different story because they use the hardware differently than PC's. There are already reports that 3gb of ram will be dedicated to the OS of the PS4. And that 2 cores of the processor will be dedicated to the OS.

Then still take into account that console games will have a locked FPS and will have graphics that cannot be turned up or down.

Then powerhouse console you are boasting about seems to get smaller and smaller.



The only actual point made so far is by Chalmer9. People will always prefer a console no matter how irrational it is.


But I'm surprised no one ever brought up console exclusives.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
Again you are wrong. All those specs mean nothing because they use the hardware differently than a PC.

But let's talk about price.

A 7850 only costs 150 dollars. That's not gonna break the bank. 8gb? Before the price hike people were buying up ram like candy and even if you go by current prices 8gb is only 80 bucks or less.

So that is still 400-500 dollars worth of PC. And it is more cost effective EVEN if you spend $800 since people need PC's these days anyway.

Now let's talk about the specs.

Current games only use 4 cores right now. That may go up in the future but guess what? 8 cores can be bought for sub 200 dollars right now. And games rarely ever use the entirety of 4 gigs let alone 8 gb. Now that's on PC.

On consoles it's a different story because they use the hardware differently than PC's. There are already reports that 3gb of ram will be dedicated to the OS of the PS4. And that 2 cores of the processor will be dedicated to the OS.

Then still take into account that console games will have a locked FPS and will have graphics that cannot be turned up or down.

Then powerhouse console you are boasting about seems to get smaller and smaller.



The only actual point made so far is by Chalmer9. People will always prefer a console no matter how irrational it is.


But I'm surprised no one ever brought up console exclusives.
Click to expand...

Yes, consoles do use hardware differently than PCs. The hardware in consoles is used significantly more efficiently. That means you need at least equivalent hardware in a PC to get the same experience. I really don't know how you're not understanding that. You don't magically get more out of the same hardware because it's called a PC instead of a Playstation. Specs are specs.

Speaking of specs, you keep talking about this mythical $400-$500 PC. You even priced one out that ended up at $490 that had half the RAM, an inferior GPU, no BD drive and no Windows license. How do you still think that $500 will cut it? Add Windows to that build and it's $590. Add the 7870 and it's $690. Double the RAM to 8GB and you're at $730. Get a BD drive and you're at $770ish. That's reality. There's no arguing that.
 
Maximus825 said:
Yes, consoles do use hardware differently than PCs. The hardware in consoles is used significantly more efficiently. That means you need at least equivalent hardware in a PC to get the same experience. I really don't know how you're not understanding that. You don't magically get more out of the same hardware because it's called a PC instead of a Playstation. Specs are specs.

Speaking of specs, you keep talking about this mythical $400-$500 PC. You even priced one out that ended up at $490 that had half the RAM, an inferior GPU, no BD drive and no Windows license. How do you still think that $500 will cut it? Add Windows to that build and it's $590. Add the 7870 and it's $690. Double the RAM to 8GB and you're at $730. Get a BD drive and you're at $770ish. That's reality. There's no arguing that.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how you don't get it. I already told you the specs you posted mean nothing because the games won't be fully maxed out graphically. They'll be locked in at a certain FPS and they won't have certain graphical features. So it might as well be a 500 dollar PC. Do YOU get that?

and if you do spend 800 bucks IT IS STILL more cost efficient because people need PC's nowadays and I don't think anyone is going to use MS Word on a PS4. And an 800 Dollar PC will max out pretty much every game.

So at the end of it you are basically paying 400 dollars for a machine that:

1. Plays games at a locked graphical setting.

2. Plays Blu-Ray

When you could have had a $500 machine:

1. Plays games at medium/high setting.

2. Could be upgraded to play blu-ray.

3. Could be upgraded to max out any game.

4. Does everything a normal PC can do and more.
 
Most people contemplating a $400 console already have a PC that does all non gaming related tasks just fine.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
I don't understand how you don't get it. I already told you the specs you posted mean nothing because the games won't be fully maxed out graphically. They'll be locked in at a certain FPS and they won't have certain graphical features. So it might as well be a 500 dollar PC. Do YOU get that?

and if you do spend 800 bucks IT IS STILL more cost efficient because people need PC's nowadays and I don't think anyone is going to use MS Word on a PS4. And an 800 Dollar PC will max out pretty much every game.

So at the end of it you are basically paying 400 dollars for a machine that:

1. Plays games at a locked graphical setting.

2. Plays Blu-Ray

When you could have had a $500 machine:

1. Plays games at medium/high setting.

2. Could be upgraded to play blu-ray.

3. Could be upgraded to max out any game.

4. Does everything a normal PC can do and more.
Click to expand...

So why don't you do that and be content without trying to proselytize? I think it goes without saying that most everyone here does indeed have a gaming PC.

Additionally, what is the biggest display a family usually has? The TV set. Yes you can connect your PC up to it, but the interface is not well suited for using from a couch. I already know you will say you can purchase a remote or some kind of wireless media keyboard, which adds more cost to this $400 gaming PC scenario. Devices like the PS4 or whatever console of choice are a natural fit for the living room.

Shit, I told my buddies a while ago to stop buying the multi-plats for consoles and get them on PC because they're so damn cheap after a couple months. But there are just games you will never get on PC - Ni No Kuni, Last of Us, Final Fantasy (excluding 11 and 14), Uncharted series, Metal Gear, et cetera.

If anything, you can look at it as a companion to your gaming PC, just like your portable consoles.

Finally, look at the technical savvy of most people; you expect them to put together a $400 gaming PC while having little to no knowledge of how to do so? So then they have to pay more to Geek Squad or whatever PC repair place, adding even more cost.

The average user can take the console, put in the power cable and HDMI cable, and be up and running in just a few minutes.

Just claiming everyone should say "screw consoles" and get this mythical $400 gaming PC is shortsighted.
 
zaxour said:
So why don't you do that and be content without trying to proselytize? I think it goes without saying that most everyone here does indeed have a gaming PC.
Click to expand...

Additionally, what is the biggest display a family usually has? The TV set. Yes you can connect your PC up to it, but the interface is not well suited for using from a couch. I already know you will say you can purchase a remote or some kind of wireless media keyboard, which adds more cost to this $400 gaming PC scenario. Devices like the PS4 or whatever console of choice are a natural fit for the living room.
Click to expand...

You have to buy the media remote for consoles seperately too.

Shit, I told my buddies a while ago to stop buying the multi-plats for consoles and get them on PC because they're so damn cheap after a couple months. But there are just games you will never get on PC - Ni No Kuni, Last of Us, Final Fantasy (excluding 11 and 14), Uncharted series, Metal Gear, et cetera.
Click to expand...

This is probably the best reason to own a console, which no one mentioned until you did.

If anything, you can look at it as a companion to your gaming PC, just like your portable consoles.

Finally, look at the technical savvy of most people; you expect them to put together a $400 gaming PC while having little to no knowledge of how to do so? So then they have to pay more to Geek Squad or whatever PC repair place, adding even more cost.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for everyone but I learned just by watching and reading free material on it.

The average user can take the console, put in the power cable and HDMI cable, and be up and running in just a few minutes.

Just claiming everyone should say "screw consoles" and get this mythical $400 gaming PC is shortsighted.
Click to expand...

I never said anyone should "screw consoles". I merely questioned that if consoles are going to cost so much why not get a gaming pc instead? Other than game exclusivity there is almost no reason not to. I'm merely challenging the pricing not the very idea of a console. If they cost 300 and below then there wouldn't be much of a question but once they start charging 400-500 then the question comes up. Consoles are getting more expensive while it is getting cheaper and cheaper to buy a gaming pc.
 
I love NHL hockey games, but they do not make them for the PC anymore, so I own a PS3 for console exclusives like NHL 14 and "The Last of Us."

I wish they made NHL on the PC as I have an awesome Titan surround lightboost 2D setup and NHL @ 120hz 2D LB would be AMAZING, but they don't....thus I have a console.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
I don't understand how you don't get it. I already told you the specs you posted mean nothing because the games won't be fully maxed out graphically. They'll be locked in at a certain FPS and they won't have certain graphical features. So it might as well be a 500 dollar PC. Do YOU get that?

and if you do spend 800 bucks IT IS STILL more cost efficient because people need PC's nowadays and I don't think anyone is going to use MS Word on a PS4. And an 800 Dollar PC will max out pretty much every game.

So at the end of it you are basically paying 400 dollars for a machine that:

1. Plays games at a locked graphical setting.

2. Plays Blu-Ray

When you could have had a $500 machine:

1. Plays games at medium/high setting.

2. Could be upgraded to play blu-ray.

3. Could be upgraded to max out any game.

4. Does everything a normal PC can do and more.
Click to expand...

Again, you're putting the effect before the cause. The lower settings of the current gen are because they're using 8 year old hardware. They use every bit of performance that the hardware can offer. It's not just shits and giggles. Developers don't say "Oh, it's a console, so let's turn down the graphics." They look at the performance that's available to them and develop so that the game runs on it. Also, "maxed out graphically" doesn't mean anything. That implies that there's a wall where graphics can't get any better. There isn't a PC in existence that can max out what developers are capable of doing. They make their games based on what hardware is capable of.

And again, a $500 PC CANNOT match what the PS4 and Xbox One are capable of. It's not even a PC vs console thing. It's similar hardware vs similar hardware. You're saying a 7770 in a machine with 4GB RAM can perform better than a 7870 in a machine with 8GB RAM. That's what you're arguing right now. It can't...
 
Maximus825 said:
Again, you're putting the effect before the cause. The lower settings of the current gen are because they're using 8 year old hardware. They use every bit of performance that the hardware can offer. It's not just shits and giggles. Developers don't say "Oh, it's a console, so let's turn down the graphics." They look at the performance that's available to them and develop so that the game runs on it. Also, "maxed out graphically" doesn't mean anything. That implies that there's a wall where graphics can't get any better. There isn't a PC in existence that can max out what developers are capable of doing. They make their games based on what hardware is capable of.

And again, a $500 PC CANNOT match what the PS4 and Xbox One are capable of. It's not even a PC vs console thing. It's similar hardware vs similar hardware. You're saying a 7770 in a machine with 4GB RAM can perform better than a 7870 in a machine with 8GB RAM. That's what you're arguing right now. It can't...
Click to expand...

... when you are comparing the same machine. True, if two PC's each with one of those specs competed against each other then yeah the system with the better hardware would win. But you are not talking about the same system. You are not talking about 2 systems using the same OS and two system using the same build of games.

You are talking about a specialized system that has it's own OS and uses the hardware in a specialized way. You are talking about games that are streamlined to run in one way and one way only.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
... when you are comparing the same machine. True, if two PC's each with one of those specs competed against each other then yeah the system with the better hardware would win. But you are not talking about the same system. You are not talking about 2 systems using the same OS and two system using the same build of games.

You are talking about a specialized system that has it's own OS and uses the hardware in a specialized way. You are talking about games that are streamlined to run in one way and one way only.
Click to expand...

yeah and sony is using customized freeBSD for a base on their os

microsoft is using 3 os on the xbone one running the other 2 in virtualization and likely all are based off the windows kernel so imagine customized windows 8 and windows rt running conjoined at the hip to windows server 2012 on the xbone you get an idea what you will be dealing with...

I think Keeping it simple is too hard for microsoft they like when there is crippling bugs and ridiculous failure rates after all there is no such thing as bad press...
 
Last edited:
Gilbert_pwns said:
You obviously didn't read. The graphics are turned down on console games anyways. So they can name whatever component they want. They aren't going to run a game at Ultra settings.

With a PC you can add a Blu-ray drive later. And a windows PC is a necessary purchase these days anyways.
Click to expand...

rudy said:
By squeezing every bit of power you mean they turn down the graphics, that's why BF3 on the console has less than half the allowed players in a server right? Because its squeezing power lol.

Man wake up, like 2 games a year will actually do anything to optimize everybody else just turns off features till it works on all 3 consoles.
Click to expand...

Yeah we get it, you can build a pc for a little more money. This topic has been beaten to death over the years. What you do not understand, despite the hardware being better on the PC. It will not guarantee that first or third party exclusives for either console will end up getting ported on the PC platform.
 
Last edited:
Consoles have there place... Idk why people compare them to computer, just doesn't seem apples to apples to me...
 
Hahaufell said:
Consoles have there place... Idk why people compare them to computer, just doesn't seem apples to apples to me...
Click to expand...

yeah it isnt rocket science. they serve completely difference markets.

Console
-inexpensive
-easy to use
-easy to setup
-has almost all the games available on pc and some exclusives
-lasts a long time, holds up well graphically ( ps3 can play bf3 on medium, there is no 600$ computer from that year that can do the same or even close)


-low end graphics and strength in comparison to high end computers


PC
-Expensive ( whoever thinks a 500$ computer is a better deal is trippin' theres no contest sorry)
-build it yourself to get a good deal, takes some work and some knowledge
-doesnt last nearly as long, upgrades are necessary sooner / more often
-few pc exclusives



for a lot of us PC is better, my system already stomps a ps4. but consoles STILL have a damn place.. even in my house. Im buying one just for exclusives and to play games i think will be more fun on the console. For other people who arent into high end pc gaming it is an extremely good option and has a lot of Pros over the PC. for the reasons listed above it is considerably more marketable to the average/mediocre gamer.. and FAMILIES.
 
-Expensive ( whoever thinks a 500$ computer is a better deal is trippin' theres no contest sorry)
Click to expand...
You are being ripped off or paying too much into aesthetics if you need a $1000 pc to play AAA titles which are just console ports these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top