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

The initial cost of a PC that can be comparable to a PS4 or Xbox One is definitely going to be higher, but over the long-term it becomes cheaper due to the much higher ongoing costs that console gaming entails. These include higher game prices (that take much, much longer to drop than the same titles on PC), obscenely high prices for official peripherals, and now ongoing fees across the board to play online. PC games are cheaper via an open digital distribution market, there are no fees required to use your internet connection, and extra devices are cheaper and much more varied.
 
There are quite a few people in this thread that don't understand that just because PC gaming is better and can be had for a decent price...that doesn't automatically mean that console people WANT to. You're just assuming that because you like PC's, so do they. People are stupid and like easy, simple shit. Ever been to Wal Mart? Those are the kinds of monsters you're assuming want to build PC's from scratch. They don't.
 
Plague_Injected said:
The initial cost of a PC that can be comparable to a PS4 or Xbox One is definitely going to be higher, but over the long-term it becomes cheaper due to the much higher ongoing costs that console gaming entails. These include higher game prices (that take much, much longer to drop than the same titles on PC), obscenely high prices for official peripherals, and now ongoing fees across the board to play online. PC games are cheaper via an open digital distribution market, there are no fees required to use your internet connection, and extra devices are cheaper and much more varied.
Click to expand...

For single player - it is comparable - not so much for multiplayer split screen play.
 
450 said:
For single player - it is comparable - not so much for multiplayer split screen play.
Click to expand...

It will depend on a couple of things. One is whether or not Sony chooses to gate off more services behind the paywall. At the start of the 360's lifespan, the only thing you couldn't get with a "Silver" level XBL membership was online multiplayer. Eventually, more and more features and services become exclusive to Gold, and then all new services automatically become Gold-exclusive, and now demos come 1-2 weeks later than everyone else (including PS3 players) for Silver members. The only thing you can do with a free membership is get title updates and demos. We could see Sony take the same path over the lifespan of the PS4 to make it as "attractive" as possible to buy PS+ by making the free option as unviable as possible, as is what Microsoft is doing.

The second thing is that split-screen multiplayer wasn't particularly great during this generation of consoles, with so many games having two small boxes with correct aspect ratios that were fucking tiny and a heap of unused screen space as its form of same-screen multiplayer. It made for a very second-rate experience and it is hard to believe that it does not have the effect (intended or not) of enticing people to buy that second game copy and, if necessary, an extra console. Some co-op games had no option for local multiplayer at all, mandating two consoles and two game copies. Since it seems a lot of games on the next consoles are aiming for 60fps at 1080p, I wonder how viable having two games on the same screen will be, and how much developers will be allowed to make it viable.
 
Did you not read?

The PC specs vs Console specs was a rebuttal made to my actual argument. I've been saying the whole time that whatever specs you can say a console has it doesn't matter.

I am agreeing that it is pointless and no one has made a good argument so far except for game exclusivity.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
Did you not read?

The PC specs vs Console specs was a rebuttal made to my actual argument. I've been saying the whole time that whatever specs you can say a console has it doesn't matter.

I am agreeing that it is pointless and no one has made a good argument so far except for game exclusivity.
Click to expand...

You initiated the discussion:

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...

Then continued to argue the merits of it (as flawed as they may be)
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
That quote of mine did not mention hardware specs once.
Click to expand...

You initiated the PC comparison discussion.


Gilbert_pwns said:
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...

Not only did you initiate it, your last comment there was obviously intended to spur a debate, which you got and then said "Exactly." in reponse to;

Focker said:
Comparing console hardware to pc hardware is pointless.
Click to expand...

In your response to Dremic you said

Gilbert_pwns said:
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.
Click to expand...

Completely ignoring all of his other points falling back on price which is an argument no one can win. Even the 500 dollar target mark is flawed since this is the PS4 we are talking about.

I GAME from my HTPC in my sig connected to a 60" 2013 Vizio M Series which is significantly more powerful than your setup and still play my PS3 and will be buying and playing a PS4 for the reasons mentioned by Dremic.

Even with Steam Big Picture it is a pain in the ass to be keyboard/mouse free or without SBP using advance launcher in XBMC creating shortcuts for PC game installs and getting around game launchers (Tomb Raider, Borderlands 2, Hitman, etc.).

That said, after working around all of the bullshit there is nothing better than playing Tomb Raider in 1080p at max settings with a 360 controller. It's just getting it all setup right that is the problem. If there is a AAA game coming out on PC I'll buy it for PC but I'm well off and have that luxury, most people don't have the time, money or patience to deal with the bullshit some people say a PC can do "Just as Easily".

I just find it hilarious how this thread for the most part was PC free until you show up, debate what you brought up and then say "Yea I know right why compare?" when it's in the console forum and is about post E3 discussion on PS4.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
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.
Click to expand...

500$ is not enough to build a computer equal to a PS4. not even close.

Gilbert_pwns said:
That's the whole point. I was asking why people would buy a console over a PC these days.
Click to expand...

we answered that for you several times. you can disagree.. but this isn't a subjective discussion its about facts.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
That's the whole point. I was asking why people would buy a console over a PC these days.
Click to expand...

Dremic answered why, and I gave specifics on some of those.

The fact is that unless Steam Box does the impossible a PC will never be plug and play. They will always have overhead, and will be a pain in the ass to setup mouse/keyboard free in a living room environment.

It takes a desire, it takes discipline, and it certainly takes dedication to make it work even with Steam Big Picture.

The average Joe doesn't want to come home after a 10 hour day and fuck with these things. Even with x86 they shouldn't be compared to a PC.
 
next-Jin said:
Dremic answered why, and I gave specifics on some of those.

The fact is that unless Steam Box does the impossible a PC will never be plug and play. They will always have overhead, and will be a pain in the ass to setup mouse/keyboard free in a living room environment.

It takes a desire, it takes discipline, and it certainly takes dedication to make it work even with Steam Big Picture.

The average Joe doesn't want to come home after a 10 hour day and fuck with these things. Even with x86 they shouldn't be compared to a PC.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of this. Hell these days after coming home from work and graduate school I barely want to play games on my PC and when I do play its Halo with my friends on my couch with my 60" plasma. I buy consoles for simplicity and exclusives. Not because they are going to have the best graphics, or be the fastest thing on earth.
 
///AMG said:
I agree with most of this. Hell these days after coming home from work and graduate school I barely want to play games on my PC and when I do play its Halo with my friends on my couch with my 60" plasma. I buy consoles for simplicity and exclusives. Not because they are going to have the best graphics, or be the fastest thing on earth.
Click to expand...

But it's not about best graphics or fastest thing on earth. You would need to spend a fortune for that. I'm talking about a budget PC that has more usability than a console. Not only that, I don't think consoles are even simple anymore. The days of just putting in a game and playing immediately are gone. There are xbox games where you put it in and wait at least half an hour for updates. Until then you literally cant play the game.
 
I just find it hilarious how this thread for the most part was PC free until you show up, debate what you brought up and then say "Yea I know right why compare?"
Click to expand...

Reread the quotes and look at the context they were in. I said it was useless to compare hardware specs between the two because that was the response people gave me.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
But it's not about best graphics or fastest thing on earth. You would need to spend a fortune for that. I'm talking about a budget PC that has more usability than a console. Not only that, I don't think consoles are even simple anymore. The days of just putting in a game and playing immediately are gone. There are xbox games where you put it in and wait at least half an hour for updates. Until then you literally cant play the game.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point. I mean, at least with PC games, you can play them without being forced to update them.

Supposedly on the Xbox One and Wii U (and probably PS4), they will update games automatically when an update becomes available, so that may resolve that issue.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
But it's not about best graphics or fastest thing on earth. You would need to spend a fortune for that. I'm talking about a budget PC that has more usability than a console. Not only that, I don't think consoles are even simple anymore. The days of just putting in a game and playing immediately are gone. There are xbox games where you put it in and wait at least half an hour for updates. Until then you literally cant play the game.
Click to expand...

What are you still arguing about? You've already been given the answer to your question, in that people still buy consoles because of:

  1. Convenience
  2. Exclusives
It's true that the gap between PC and consoles in both of the above has been narrowing, but it still exists, and most likely always will.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
But it's not about best graphics or fastest thing on earth. You would need to spend a fortune for that. I'm talking about a budget PC that has more usability than a console. Not only that, I don't think consoles are even simple anymore. The days of just putting in a game and playing immediately are gone. There are xbox games where you put it in and wait at least half an hour for updates. Until then you literally cant play the game.
Click to expand...

how is a game automatically updating more difficult to use? theyre still simple as shit. and most updates are quite quick.

what does a PC having more usability have anything to do with this?

most people already have a computer dude. they just dont have one that can play games like a ps4 can.


this is a bout gaming and common sense.

for 80% of gamers / families / children consoles are a great value

in fact consoles are a great value for pc gamers like myself STILL and i'll play it half as much as people who dont have a gaming pc, because games that come out on the pc i will buy for the pc instead.

impossible to beat a console value. for those that arent looking for value and want to play high end computer games they will pay more and they will get more.
 
dremic said:
how is a game automatically updating more difficult to use? theyre still simple as shit. and most updates are quite quick.

what does a PC having more usability have anything to do with this?

most people already have a computer dude. they just dont have one that can play games like a ps4 can.


this is a bout gaming and common sense.

for 80% of gamers / families / children consoles are a great value

in fact consoles are a great value for pc gamers like myself STILL and i'll play it half as much as people who dont have a gaming pc, because games that come out on the pc i will buy for the pc instead.

impossible to beat a console value. for those that arent looking for value and want to play high end computer games they will pay more and they will get more.
Click to expand...

Except that you'll have to pay a monthly fee for PS4 and Xbox One online play. And the games generally (But not always) cost more on the consoles. That mitigates part of the cost of building a PC.
 
If the average person that makes the cost debate with consoles and PCs upgrade anywhere near what I do PCs cost more over the span of 6-10 years.

Since 06 alone I've spent at least 2200 or more in videocards.

It's just not worth even bringing it up.
 
Gilbert_pwns said:
Why?
Click to expand...
Man, you really don't get it do you? if you built a system last gen which was around 05/06. You would know it would at least take 2 system upgrades to play games from 05 till now. I had a 8800 gtx in 06 . it was seriously starting to show age around 2009/2010. From there i had to do a minor upgrade which was a 6850. I'm currently on a 580 gtx. I can't imagine playing Bioshock infinite with everything turned down on a 8800 gtx. i already know the 6850 is choking on that game.

edit:

this arguement is older then your tenure on [H]. Btw that 7770 you listed is no better then a 6 series ATi
 
Sixthsense said:
Man, you really don't get it do you? if you built a system last gen which was around 05/06. You would know it would at least take 2 system upgrades to play games from 05 till now. I had a 8800 gtx in 06 . it was seriously starting to show age around 2009/2010. From there i had to do a minor upgrade which was a 6850. I'm currently on a 580 gtx. I can't imagine playing Bioshock infinite with everything turned down on a 8800 gtx. i already know the 6850 is choking on that game.

edit:

this arguement is older then your tenure on [H]. Btw that 7770 you listed is no better then a 6 series ATi
Click to expand...

So how does that all add up to $2200?

You can get completely serviceable video cards that last at least 3 or 4 years for $250.
 
ballistic90 said:
So how does that all add up to $2200?

You can get completely serviceable video cards that last at least 3 or 4 years for $250.
Click to expand...

it doesn't , at least for me Although, the cards alone are already a grand. i didn't mention the processor upgrades either.

Fair enough , starting from 06 what did you do?
 
ballistic90 said:
So how does that all add up to $2200?

You can get completely serviceable video cards that last at least 3 or 4 years for $250.
Click to expand...

If I am going to game on a PC it's going to be with powerful hardware which is the MAIN reason why people say go with PC's.

I have yet to see anyone say they would rather game on a cheap ass PC as opposed to a console.
 
Sixthsense said:
it doesn't , at least for me Although, the cards alone are already a grand. i didn't mention the processor upgrades either.

Fair enough , starting from 06 what did you do?
Click to expand...

I'd been using laptops starting from 1996, since I never had any deskspace to set up a desktop.

Starting in 2006, I had a shitty laptop that I struggled with and spent entirely too much on, then in 2008, my Christmas present from my wife was the money to build a my first desktop from scratch. It had kinda crappy internals but easily played most games for years. I upgraded the video card for $120 a few years ago, and ended up getting an Xbox 360 for my wife and myself.

At this point, I can replace the motherboard, video card, ram and CPU for $550 and hook it up to my TV and use it for a console instead. I already got an SSD for the main system drive and a hard drive for standard storage.

I made a bunch of shitty mistakes choosing my hardware internals for my desktop initially (beginner's folly, I suppose), but I feel like it was an investment in getting to understand WHY you don't buy a $69 CPU or a $100 GPU.
 
next-Jin said:
If I am going to game on a PC it's going to be with powerful hardware which is the MAIN reason why people say go with PC's.

I have yet to see anyone say they would rather game on a cheap ass PC as opposed to a console.
Click to expand...

My wife would dissagree. She finds Civ 5 to alone be worth gaming on a cheap PC over a console. Also Baldur's Gate and the many, MANY games you can't get on consoles.
 
ballistic90 said:
At this point, I can replace the motherboard, video card, ram and CPU for $550 and hook it up to my TV and use it for a console instead. I already got an SSD for the main system drive and a hard drive for standard storage.
Click to expand...

Please please please do this and be sure to start a thread covering your experiences
 
ballistic90 said:
My wife would dissagree. She finds Civ 5 to alone be worth gaming on a cheap PC over a console. Also Baldur's Gate and the many, MANY games you can't get on consoles.
Click to expand...

I don't game on the PC to play Civ5 at shitty settings or a decade old game that a PS1 could have done.
 
ballistic90 said:
I'd been using laptops starting from 1996, since I never had any deskspace to set up a desktop.

Starting in 2006, I had a shitty laptop that I struggled with and spent entirely too much on, then in 2008, my Christmas present from my wife was the money to build a my first desktop from scratch. It had kinda crappy internals but easily played most games for years. I upgraded the video card for $120 a few years ago, and ended up getting an Xbox 360 for my wife and myself.

At this point, I can replace the motherboard, video card, ram and CPU for $550 and hook it up to my TV and use it for a console instead. I already got an SSD for the main system drive and a hard drive for standard storage.

I made a bunch of shitty mistakes choosing my hardware internals for my desktop initially (beginner's folly, I suppose), but I feel like it was an investment in getting to understand WHY you don't buy a $69 CPU or a $100 GPU.
Click to expand...

Oh well , live and learn;)

Back on topic, I hope Sony doesn't carry over the PSN store in it's current state to the PS4 on launch. I wouldn't mind seeing the Vita as as a secondary monitor if the bundle rumor is true.
 
Sixthsense said:
Oh well , live and learn;)

Back on topic, I hope Sony doesn't carry over the PSN store in it's current state to the PS4 on launch. I wouldn't mind seeing the Vita as as a secondary monitor if the bundle rumor is true.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but that's what completely soured me on both the PS4 and Xbox One. I understand what the problem is, but it STILL irritates me. I would still be pissed that you couldn't use a disc from the previous generation on the new console, but if they let you use even a portion of the games you bought digitally on your previous console, it would have been a big help in pushing me in that direction. The hard cut off between the generations is a big annoyance.
 
ballistic90 said:
Except that you'll have to pay a monthly fee for PS4 and Xbox One online play. And the games generally (But not always) cost more on the consoles. That mitigates part of the cost of building a PC.
Click to expand...

maybe after ten years. nope not even then

50$ a year for psn.
 
next-Jin said:
Not at all, I am encouraging you. Hopefully after you try you will wise up.
Click to expand...

I already wisened up. I know exactly the hardware that would fit my needs, the expected bottlenecks and where I'd best spend my money. If you compare a PS4 hooked up to an HDTV to a well planned PC hooked up to the same TV, the PC would come out on top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top