PC gaming is cheaper then Console gaming(according to IGN)

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
That's not always true. Everytime their is a major OS switch you have games that stop working and some can be modified as a work around some can't. With windows 9x to nt systems I can think of south park's shooter not working. Going from xp to vista/7 also dropped some comparability. Keeping an old pc around to play them is the same as keeping an old console and for a while at least virtual pc software wouldn't run the stuff fast enough(although it would now).



I know a few people without TV's but I agree with your point. The console will run off a computer monitor fine. For a few years I had my xbox hooked up to my second 22inch lcd at my desk. The TV shouldn't have been on the quote. In the end it doesn't matter. The guy who wrote the article comes off as an idiot.

Yea a lot of newer consoles can be hooked up to a monitor, but then you have demographics that due to space like dorm rooms people just buy LCD TVs with tuners in them and hook them up to a PC/gaming console anyways.

Here is the problem. It is hard to say you can game on a PC on the couch without using a controller because posture problems as well as the awkwardness of trying to use a mouse and keyboard on your lap.

Also setting up a desk does nothing because you will be leaning forward just to use the mouse and keyboard which puts a ton of strain on your lower back.

Therefore if you game on the PC in your family room you almost need an upright chair and desk.

Likewise if you console game on a PC desk/monitor you are always confined to the small space in your office.

This is one of the advantages of PC gaming. Easy set up, easy to use in a comfortable environment and a social experience when friends come over.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
By the way all the graphics comparisons become a moot point. If you guys like to believe that a Intel HD 3000 video card is faster than an Xbox 360 than can you show me a game like BF3 running on an Intel HD 3000 that has superior graphics quality running at 30 fps versus the 360?

You can't the way games are coded and the overhead of the PC means that to run comparable games I almost need twice the specs than what an Xbox has.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
I have found PC gaming cheaper for several reasons but this article was terribly written. First of all you do not need to be that good at checking prices to see for what he built he could have had a much better system maybe there is some tax in Britain or something.

Second you cannot compare independent items. The monitor / TV was terrible, I play with an HTPC on a TV sometimes, and you can console game on monitors and lots of people do it. The internet connection also is odd, you are going to have that with any house even if you just face book. XBL gold is legit though but alot of people who play xbox tell me XBL ends up being something you pay for no matter what because between the deals they offer and what not you might as well just get it.

So the point is for most people things like TVs and Internet connections are going to always be paid for in the house so they cannot be added to the price.

The big myth on the PC side is that it costs you the full price of a PC. Once again you need a PC in most homes and so making it a gaming PC is just the extra cost to get you there not the whole cost of the PC. Also there is a ridiculous lack of comparing quality. Alot of people ask me how much did you spend on your rig and when I tell them they say see no chance that is too expensive, and I say well you don't have a $150 mechanical keyboard you can enjoy on your PC, you can game with any keyboard but the quality on PC is completely up to you to decide. The $50 G500 mouse gives a level of precision and control a console will probably never see in the next 10 years. I can run alot of games faster than 120 fps on 120hz monitors. Many people just think you need to spend alot of money but the fact is you do not it is simply a choice that is more common of PC gamers because they have already decided that settling for low quality is not acceptable. Where as alot of console gamers simply do not even know what FPS is and call everything that happens on the console just "lag" not realizing that it is actually a ton of different things like the fact you are only running 30FPS and have 100 ms input lag and ghosting on your TV. Because everyone has the same controller no one asked why the controller has input lag. The competition has mad the experience on a PC 100x better than a console will ever achieve if you start taking in the whole experience. Every time I goto a friends and play xbox I cannot believe how long it takes to load a level / start a game.

And finally you do not need all that stuff to game very well and competitively on a PC. I knew lots of people who were some of the best in various games who ran what I thought were pretty old crappy computers. $5 keyboards basic mice and so on.

You are assuming that everyone can notice the difference between 30 FPS/60 FPS 100 ms input lag ghosting blah blah blah.

Most people are absorbed in an experience playing a game that unless you stand next to your TV or are completely anal you won't notice these things.

Also it is completely moronic to not assume the full cost of the PC. Most people do not even own a PC as their primary computer. If I didn't game on the PC I would far and wide never use a PC as a primary computer. My Lennovo T400 laptop is my primary computer. It is my work machine, the machine I browse the web on as well as do personal work.

Plus you factor in the cost to get a laptop with a decent graphics card can cost upwards of 800-1000, when most people are buying laptops in the 400-500 dollar range.

Owning a PC for cheap gaming just isn't realistic for people. People move/travel for work etc that the need for a mobile PC is more important than owning a PC just to game.
 

BigJayDogg3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
1,676
By the way all the graphics comparisons become a moot point. If you guys like to believe that a Intel HD 3000 video card is faster than an Xbox 360 than can you show me a game like BF3 running on an Intel HD 3000 that has superior graphics quality running at 30 fps versus the 360?

You can't the way games are coded and the overhead of the PC means that to run comparable games I almost need twice the specs than what an Xbox has.

The 3k cant do it, butI think I've already shown this with the e6600 and gts450 example...

I know AMDs integrated graphics solution comes close as well. There is an article on PcPer where they benchmark it.
 

Tudz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
7,434
By the way all the graphics comparisons become a moot point. If you guys like to believe that a Intel HD 3000 video card is faster than an Xbox 360 than can you show me a game like BF3 running on an Intel HD 3000 that has superior graphics quality running at 30 fps versus the 360?

You can't the way games are coded and the overhead of the PC means that to run comparable games I almost need twice the specs than what an Xbox has.

I dunno about the HD 3000, I don't own one. But my 8800GTS 320mb was dominating the 360 up until it died. Games that the 360/PS3 struggled with 720p and low settings, I was playing at 1080p and medium/high settings. I made a particular point to compare games at any chance I got, as when I bought the 8800GTS 320mb, it was instead of buying a 360, so I've always kept an eye on multiplatform games and checked that, yes, the 8800GTS has kept me playing at better settings than a 360 right up until I got rid of it.

That 8800GTS 320mb is now so low end you can barely buy cards that slow any more.
 

Staples

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 18, 2001
Messages
7,978
This could only be true if you pirate all software including Windows.

Articles like this really damage the reputation of these sites.

I want to hear of the $400 PC + Windows (yes, Windows costs money which people seem to forget) you could buy in 2005 that can play Skyrim or Battlefield 3.

I'd say that even now, 6 year later it would be hard if not impossible to build a $300 (the current price) windows machine that can outpace an Xbox 360 graphically.

So unless you defer cost to pirating Windows and games or you buy dozens of games a year and add up the cost in savings in games, then no, PC gaming is in no way cheaper than console gaming and if you believe it is, then you just don't understand math.
 
Last edited:

Tudz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
7,434
This could only be true if you pirate all software including Windows.

Articles like this really damage the reputation of these sites.

To be honest, the only way I see PC gaming as cheaper is if you already plan on buying a PC for other reasons, and then the cost for "gaming" is only the cost of the GPU, as you already own Windows and everything else you need for gaming (unless you use Linux :p). Some people might say that's moronic, like this person...
Also it is completely moronic to not assume the full cost of the PC. Most people do not even own a PC as their primary computer. If I didn't game on the PC I would far and wide never use a PC as a primary computer. My Lennovo T400 laptop is my primary computer. It is my work machine, the machine I browse the web on as well as do personal work.
But honestly, its true for me. Maybe you survive with a laptop as your primary machine, I don't, never have and probably never will. I owned desktop PCs before I started desktop PC gaming, and was going to buy a new desktop at the time I bought my first true gaming PC, so this is how I justified it to myself.

I was either going to buy a shit PC + an Xbox 360.
OR
I was going to buy a PC that could play games.

A laptop was never on the radar. Even now, the laptop I own is a 4 year old netbook and it will never be my primary PC, I have no need for anything better, coz I have an awesome desktop at home, and awesome desktop at work and an external drive + rsync to keep the two computers synced together.

My boss spent $2300 on his laptop and even in the applications I use for work its so sluggish compared to my desktop at half the price.
 

Baker

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 12, 2003
Messages
3,474
I think the real question is, why does this topic keep coming up? I've debated on this topic several times a few years ago, but it's interesting how it keeps coming up. Like people are trying to prove something.

Lets just go with X is more expensive, and get back to what matters, playing games!!!
 

MrCrispy

2[H]4U
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
3,950
It's not about software vs hardware at all. Its about being able to play games from your couch, investing the upfront cost saved in a big screen tv + HT (if you don't already have one) which can be used for much more beyond gaming, being able to easily play games with people who come over, Netflix etc. Consoles are more than just gaming devices.

I can guarantee you almost everyone who pays fro XBox Live/PSN doesn't mind doing so and would prefer over the alternative of maintaining a Windows pc with patches/updates.

The bottom line is you have to decide between a dedicated gaming pc or a console, you're probably a hardcore gamer and would be better off building one. For most people consoles are a no-brainer which is why the console merket is so huge.
 

UtopiA

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
3,509
Its about being able to play games from your couch, investing the upfront cost saved in a big screen tv + HT (if you don't already have one) which can be used for much more beyond gaming, being able to easily play games with people who come over, Netflix etc. Consoles are more than just gaming devices.
Can't you say the same things about PC's though?
The famous "Couch Excuse" was and will always be a failure cop-out used by consolers. The furniture in your house isn't connected to your console or even the room it's in (generally). You can have a couch, console, or PC all within the same distance of each other. None of this has anything to do with "price" though. In fact it makes console gaming more expensive since you have to buy the damn couch, and the television.

There's an "upfront cost" savings for PC gaming as well, since even consolers have to buy a PC/Monitor anyway. So that doesn't work for you, either. Everyone must own a PC and, at the very least, a screen of some kind (probably a monitor). Televisions aren't required, neither are couches, actually. If we're discussing which is more expensive then you've just given us a few reasons why consoles are more expensive. Consolers have to buy a PC, television, console, "couch", and maybe a monitor. PC gamers only need a PC, monitor, and some kind of chair ("couch" optional).

Netflix and other streaming services also work on PC's, and hey, 1080p+ monitors are cheaper than televisions. That's part of your "couch" overhead since you need a 50" screen to be physically visible from your couch whereas 24" serves the same purpose from a computer desk.

"FRIENDS" huh? Guess you better buy a nice couch and a 50" panel. Enjoy that lavish spending so you can play Mario Party with your buddies.
 
Last edited:

MrCrispy

2[H]4U
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
3,950
What you say is only true if you have the same setup for both your computing and media needs. A lot of people already have a tv and pc and usually in separate rooms, so the choice is whether to convert your pc to a htpc gaming pc, dedicated gaming pc, or a console. Obviously if you don't have a living room+tv already, things change.

I don't get why you feel the need to insult people who play consoles as if its not a valid choice.
 

UtopiA

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
3,509
I don't get why you feel the need to insult people who play consoles as if its not a valid choice.
Because we're talking about value, not personal preferences.
You can choose to like certain things about consoles (some of which also applies to PC gaming so they're not valid excuses anyway) but this also means you'll be spending more.
 

Plague_Injected

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
6,621
PC gaming is cheaper than console gaming after the initial outlay. PC games are on sale more often and come down in RRP faster. There is no uniform subscriptions to be able to play anything online or do stuff like using Netflix, Facebook or Youtube. There are very inexpensive control devices (i.e. KB/M).

Console guys always bring up the "oh you have to upgrade every 6-12 months on PC to keep up", neglecting that each of the two HD consoles has undergone significant upgrades since launch. The launch 360 with its 13.9GB HDD is no good for everything Xbox Live now has on offer, when some games come with extra install discs, some games require the discs to be ripped to the HDD to work properly, very large DLC packages, and the option to download very large movie files through Zune. The PS3's 60GB launch HDD is certainly better equipped but is nothing compared to the 320GB models. PC games require Internet activations, but Internet connectivity is practically mandatory for console users also, since almost every game launches in some kind of glitchy or flatout-broken state.

Not to mention there is PSMove and Kinect, which will probably become less and less optional as MS and Sony continue pushing developers into incorporating those devices into games more and more. Yes, ultimately they are optional, but so is replacing your graphics card every six months.
 

Staples

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 18, 2001
Messages
7,978
All I have to say is that I bought a console on launch day with a 20GB drive. It has died twice because the Xbox was the most unreliable consumer electronic product ever however it was replaced twice under manufacturers warranty. I buy tons of stuff off Xbox Live and I still have that 20GB drive attached to it and also a 16GB flash drive I bought for $20 at Best Buy. No one really needs a 250GB drive, there are zero advantages to it other than storing all your games on it may make things load slightly faster.

$420 there with zero upgrades. Not bad for 6 years of gaming, and a system that play today's games just fine.
 

BDS23

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
476
It's not about software vs hardware at all. Its about being able to play games from your couch, investing the upfront cost saved in a big screen tv + HT (if you don't already have one) which can be used for much more beyond gaming, being able to easily play games with people who come over, Netflix etc. Consoles are more than just gaming devices.

I can guarantee you almost everyone who pays fro XBox Live/PSN doesn't mind doing so and would prefer over the alternative of maintaining a Windows pc with patches/updates.

The bottom line is you have to decide between a dedicated gaming pc or a console, you're probably a hardcore gamer and would be better off building one. For most people consoles are a no-brainer which is why the console merket is so huge.

I'm annoyed at the 'couch excuse' that most consoler gamers keep using. Just saying.
 

Tudz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
7,434
I'm annoyed at the 'couch excuse' that most consoler gamers keep using. Just saying.

Yeah, I can understand it from a multiplayer perspective. I still get together with friends with a slab and play console games. Its just not as easy to do that with PC. But couch gaming these days is viable regardless of whether you have a PC or a console, especially since you can buy long HDMI cables and wireless 360 controllers.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
PC gaming is cheaper than console gaming after the initial outlay. PC games are on sale more often and come down in RRP faster. There is no uniform subscriptions to be able to play anything online or do stuff like using Netflix, Facebook or Youtube. There are very inexpensive control devices (i.e. KB/M).

Console guys always bring up the "oh you have to upgrade every 6-12 months on PC to keep up", neglecting that each of the two HD consoles has undergone significant upgrades since launch. The launch 360 with its 13.9GB HDD is no good for everything Xbox Live now has on offer, when some games come with extra install discs, some games require the discs to be ripped to the HDD to work properly, very large DLC packages, and the option to download very large movie files through Zune. The PS3's 60GB launch HDD is certainly better equipped but is nothing compared to the 320GB models. PC games require Internet activations, but Internet connectivity is practically mandatory for console users also, since almost every game launches in some kind of glitchy or flatout-broken state.

Not to mention there is PSMove and Kinect, which will probably become less and less optional as MS and Sony continue pushing developers into incorporating those devices into games more and more. Yes, ultimately they are optional, but so is replacing your graphics card every six months.

PS3 does not have a subscription based model. Xbox Live does, but there are value added services to having Xbox Live. One is Last.Fm which works pretty well as a music player if you are having guests over. The other which I would gladly pay the subscription fee for is ESPN.

It is unfair to say that Netflix is an added cost because it doesn't have to do with gaming.

For a year I used ESPN3 as a replacement for cable.

Finally what you say is complete misinformation. I have an Xbox Slim and I only got it because I did want to upgrade from my launch console and kmart had a 75 dollar GC deal. But I use my 13.9 GB hard drive in my slim now and it has been doing great for I can't remember how long.

I have never met a game that didn't work unless you installed it. The installing factor is for faster load times. It isn't required. And I only have about 2 Xbox Live games and the I still can save a lot of content to the Xbox. I am proactive about deleting files and I don't download movies.

Finally replacing your graphics card isn't optional. If you had a graphics card from 2005 (the same year the Xbox 360 came out) then there is no way games like BF3 would run today.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
Yeah, I can understand it from a multiplayer perspective. I still get together with friends with a slab and play console games. Its just not as easy to do that with PC. But couch gaming these days is viable regardless of whether you have a PC or a console, especially since you can buy long HDMI cables and wireless 360 controllers.

No you can't.

I want someone to show me how they play Starcraft/WoW/Supreme Commander/Guild Wars etc from the comfort of their couch.

Do you bend your wrist at a 90 degree angle to control the mouse. Do you put the keyboard on your lap? Even if you have a table you are still leaning forward which puts a great amount of stress on your lower back.

The only way to game in your living room is to have a computer chair and makeshift desk.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
All I have to say is that I bought a console on launch day with a 20GB drive. It has died twice because the Xbox was the most unreliable consumer electronic product ever however it was replaced twice under manufacturers warranty. I buy tons of stuff off Xbox Live and I still have that 20GB drive attached to it and also a 16GB flash drive I bought for $20 at Best Buy. No one really needs a 250GB drive, there are zero advantages to it other than storing all your games on it may make things load slightly faster.

$420 there with zero upgrades. Not bad for 6 years of gaming, and a system that play today's games just fine.

I am not going to say that the Xbox is reliable and I am using some hardware in my PC that is 7-8 years old, but to say that PC gaming also isn't without problems would be wrong.

I have many clients as well as friends that have had graphic cards/harddrives/multiple OS costs/etc die on them over the last 8 years.
 

Tudz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
7,434
No you can't.

I want someone to show me how they play Starcraft/WoW/Supreme Commander/Guild Wars etc from the comfort of their couch.

Do you bend your wrist at a 90 degree angle to control the mouse. Do you put the keyboard on your lap? Even if you have a table you are still leaning forward which puts a great amount of stress on your lower back.

The only way to game in your living room is to have a computer chair and makeshift desk.

I never at any point said you should use a PC exclusively from a couch, you can try if you want, but thats not what I said. Some games lend themselves to couch gaming, like console ports, those games you can play with a wireless controller on a couch using a nice long HDMI cable. Games like Starcraft, well you can try and play them from a couch with a lap table, I'm sure some people do that, otherwise you get up off your arse, walk to your desk and play it there... if you owned a console you would never get Starcraft in the first place so you wouldn't have the option. That's the glory of the PC, you can do whatever the fuck you want with it, game at a desk, game at a couch, use it as a media center. The only thing I can see a console doing better at is local multiplayer, PC games aren't set up for multiple-input multiplayer gaming.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
I never at any point said you should use a PC exclusively from a couch, you can try if you want, but thats not what I said. Some games lend themselves to couch gaming, like console ports, those games you can play with a wireless controller on a couch using a nice long HDMI cable. Games like Starcraft, well you can try and play them from a couch with a lap table, I'm sure some people do that, otherwise you get up off your arse, walk to your desk and play it there... if you owned a console you would never get Starcraft in the first place so you wouldn't have the option. That's the glory of the PC, you can do whatever the fuck you want with it, game at a desk, game at a couch, use it as a media center. The only thing I can see a console doing better at is local multiplayer, PC games aren't set up for multiple-input multiplayer gaming.

You say you can use a PC from the couch. I am saying you can't with some of the most popular PC exclusives. Any other games I can consider a moot point because most people aren't going to build a 1500 dollar machine to play one computer game if they can already play it on the Xbox and it is just as good which is what most multiplatform games are now a days..better on console.

Likewise Starcraft and WoW pretty much run on anything. I will still need a computer, a laptop or whatever and frankly my Macbook used to tear through both games. My Lenovo T400 runs SC2 and WoW.
 

Godmachine

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
10,472
Running a game and running it well are two very different beasts. You can run "WoW" on just about anything but if there are lots of players or NPC's on screen it'll become a slide show real fast which just about kills your usefulness in WoW.
 

Nytegard

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
3,560
You say you can use a PC from the couch. I am saying you can't with some of the most popular PC exclusives. Any other games I can consider a moot point because most people aren't going to build a 1500 dollar machine to play one computer game if they can already play it on the Xbox and it is just as good which is what most multiplatform games are now a days..better on console.

Why can't you play them on a couch? About the only reason I see is font size, and most AAA games offer fairly large fonts that are readable, even on a TV sitting far back. Sure, you'll have a horrible kdr if you try playing an FPS, but just because you won't be nearly as good of a player doesn't mean you can't play it. Fun is fun.

If they don't offer gamepad support? A $10-$20 lap desk along with a wireless usb hub works wonders. And for games I don't feel like dragging a large keyboard over, I have a nostromo gamepad.

Also, I find it kind of ignorant that you're stating a person won't build a PC to play a game which they can find on the XBox. I play games on whatever system I feel gives me the best experience. For most games, I find that's the PC. It's personal preference, and not fact on what people want to play a game on.
 

Nytegard

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
3,560
Running a game and running it well are two very different beasts. You can run "WoW" on just about anything but if there are lots of players or NPC's on screen it'll become a slide show real fast which just about kills your usefulness in WoW.

The problem here though, with the arguement many people who prefer consoles use though is that it's not about running a game versus running it well. It's about running a game well the way you'd like to have your graphical options set to versus with the framerate you feel you deserve versus running a game the way you can realistically have your options set to.

If your PC is the same age as an XBox 360, or PS3, chances are you can run practically any game well, provided you set the options to low. But you feel disappointed that running Battlefield 3 with every option at max is a slideshow. This is where many consolitis companies are actually fairly intelligent. I swear, if you took a scale of 1-10 (10 being graphically the most superior), people would rather have a game be a 5, provided 5 was labeled as Ultra Graphics, than have the game be a 10, even if the game offered you to scale down all the way and match the lesser quality version, just because they're upset their aged machine can't run a game with maxxed out graphics.

That's one thing that really disappoints me with this latest generation of PC gamers. It use to be everyone knew games included future proofing, and you had to scale down. It was a horrible disservice to the community when some company (albeit with a ridicuously intelligent marketing department) stated "Here, you can run our graphically inferior game, but at least it labels the settings as Ultra!"
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
Why can't you play them on a couch? About the only reason I see is font size, and most AAA games offer fairly large fonts that are readable, even on a TV sitting far back. Sure, you'll have a horrible kdr if you try playing an FPS, but just because you won't be nearly as good of a player doesn't mean you can't play it. Fun is fun.

If they don't offer gamepad support? A $10-$20 lap desk along with a wireless usb hub works wonders. And for games I don't feel like dragging a large keyboard over, I have a nostromo gamepad.

Also, I find it kind of ignorant that you're stating a person won't build a PC to play a game which they can find on the XBox. I play games on whatever system I feel gives me the best experience. For most games, I find that's the PC. It's personal preference, and not fact on what people want to play a game on.

All this extra equipment adds to the cost, but you cant have a lap desk. You are bending your wrist/elbow at a 90 degree angle to move the mouse. Try it, your wrist pretty much goes numb in a few minutes. Your arm needs to be slightly bent and straight, which is what a desk/chair allows you to do.

I am not sure why it is ignorant to assume that. Compare BF3 on PC to PS3. Unless you are looking for things like smoke trails on rocket launchers/textures on walls most people aren't noticing these little details.

My girlfriend plays WoW at ultra low settings. She sees the difference on my awesome gaming machine and I prefer to play that way, but for her and most people it comes down to cost. She would never spend the money just to run a game better.

Most people wouldn't either. Most casual gamers that are PC gamers by the way are happy just to run WoW. Likewise most people are happy just to play BF3 on their consoles with medium level graphics.

Companies appeal to that.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
Running a game and running it well are two very different beasts. You can run "WoW" on just about anything but if there are lots of players or NPC's on screen it'll become a slide show real fast which just about kills your usefulness in WoW.

For someone that doesn't raid or sit in Org all the time WoW runs fine on integrated graphics. WoW is pretty CPU and memory dependent as well.
 

XvMMvX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,665
It is not about cost or graphics...these lame tired rehashed arguments are pointless.

Console gaming dominates PC gaming because of implementation and ease of use. I don't care how much more accurate or whatever a keyboard and mouse is...people do not want to sit at a desk to play a game...period. I for one see all the benefits of PC gaming, but I fucking can't stand using a keyboard and mouse and sitting at a desk...so I play mostly on my PS3 from the comfort of my couch. I finally found a setup though that allows me to play from my recliner in comfort with a keyboard and mouse (compromise of me getting the power of the pc, my recliner, 52 inch LED TV...I still have to use the KB/M). The headaches I went throught to find it though was ridiculous to expect anyone to do that.

You are bending your wrist/elbow at a 90 degree angle to move the mouse. Try it, your wrist pretty much goes numb in a few minutes. Your arm needs to be slightly bent and straight, which is what a desk/chair allows you to do.

Simply not true...you can make it work but it takes a lof of tweaking to ge there.
 

Nytegard

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
3,560
Console gaming dominates PC gaming because of implementation and ease of use.

While I'd agree with this, I think it's only a part of why console gaming dominates PC gaming. Advertising and convention I feel are two key parts that could be argued to a degree could be as big of a factor as ease of use, especially considering that consoles are becoming more complex to use whereas PC's are becoming significantly simpler. (i.e. Every time I turn on my PS3, it seems like there's always a system update that needs manual attention, whereas games on Steam just update).

This might just be my cynical nature, but if you spend enough money you can get people to buy or believe almost anything. But I'm not really going to delve into this, as it's pretty evident for most people, and would just be way too long of a post.

Convention though is something that's horribly underrepresented. People buy games for consoles because they believe consoles are for games. They don't buy games for PC's because PC's aren't gaming machines. It doesn't matter if one can't run something else than it's advertised purpose, or run something other than it's advertised purpose better than a specialized machine. It's about perception.

People were brought up to believe you play games on consoles. Therefore, you play games on consoles. Hence, you teach the next generation that you play games on consoles, and the cycle repeats.
 

Tudz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
7,434
You say you can use a PC from the couch. I am saying you can't with some of the most popular PC exclusives. Any other games I can consider a moot point because most people aren't going to build a 1500 dollar machine to play one computer game if they can already play it on the Xbox and it is just as good which is what most multiplatform games are now a days..better on console.

2 things...

1. Multiplatform games are almost always better on PC. The only reason people moan that its better on consoles is they have higher standards for PC, but the PC versions are almost always more flexible and have vastly superior graphics and performance. Even a game like Darksiders which has almost no graphics options for the PC and feels like a direct port, it is far better on PC than console.

2. You're acting like its a disadvantage to have exclusives that can't be played on a couch... like I said, there's plenty of games that can be played on a couch, the console ports or the console-like games (like TW2). In addition to that, you have games which are a cut above console games and as such can't really be played any way but with a KB+mouse, I've never tried playing with a lap table so can't comment on that, but even if you can't play them on a lap table, I don't see how its a disadvantage to have games that are too complicated to play on a couch.

I also don't get what you mean by bending your wrist/elbow at 90 degrees, I often use my laptop with a wireless mouse while sitting on the couch... I just use the mouse on the side of my leg or on the surface of the couch and have never had wrist problems, its quite comfortable actually and more natural than being at a desk, as your arm naturally falls by your side and you have to raise it to sit it on a desk. A lap table would further raise your arm. Yeah ok, your elbow might be at 90 degrees, but so what? Looking at my stance at a desk, its close to 90 degrees there as well... your wrist at 90 degrees? Say wha? No... I can't think of a single seating position which would place your wrist at 90 degrees. I'm honestly not seeing the ergonomic problem you're describing. The only problem I can think of is that the lap table might not be stable enough for gaming seriously. I'm tempted to set one up now just to try it, but I don't have a couch positioned conveniently to do it :p

A friend of mine has his PC set up so he has a big screen on his desk in his lounge room and a couch behind it. So he sits at his desk to play competitive FPS games, then can sit back on his couch to play controller-type games and watch movies through his PC which he uses as a media centre... so its really all about how you set it up, not a limitation of the PC whether you do or don't sit on your couch to play games.
 
Last edited:

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
Once again this whole issue with couch vs desk is also meaningless. There is no difference between a console and a PC. You can set a console up at a desk, or a couch and you can do the same for a PC. You can use the same xbox or PS3 controllers on a PC and they have minikeyboards you can use if you want. For some games where it is better to have variable speed constrol the controllers joysticks are better than a mouse or keyboard. Flying is an example. However obviously those games would benifit more from a full sized joystick.

The main difference too me is just what is common. When I suggest to most mass consumers that they use a computer at their TV they make odd comments suggesting they never thought of it. It is almost mind boggling how consumers really never think outside of the box. If something is not shown to them on TV they do not think it is possible. That is why these smart TVs and such are taking off alot of consumers cant realize they can just hook up their laptop to their TV via the HDMI port it almost certainly already has and watch netflix.

I like the idea above about a desk behind a couch if I had the space I would do that. But for now one of my PCs runs as an HTPC and it is nice because it simplified the whole entertainment center there are only 3 devices in there reciever, cable box and the HTPC. And what is interesting is this is my womans computer and she probably spends the majority of her time doing everything right on the couch including PS, emailing and word. The favorite position for the mouse seems to be setting it on the couches arm rest. But just in case we got a pair of xbox wireless controllers. Some people will come over and cannot handle working with a mouse in games so this works.

The one program I am most dissapointed in steam only because it does not support windows dpi scaling so you cannot automatically make text bigger if your TV is far away.
 
Last edited:

Nytegard

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
3,560
All this extra equipment adds to the cost, but you cant have a lap desk. You are bending your wrist/elbow at a 90 degree angle to move the mouse. Try it, your wrist pretty much goes numb in a few minutes. Your arm needs to be slightly bent and straight, which is what a desk/chair allows you to do.

I have no clue what you are talking about. Of course extra equipment adds costs. They're called accessories, and these things exist on the console too. If a person wants a chatpad on their XBox, good for them. Regardless of PC or console, I'd rather have a better gaming experience than a worse gaming experience.

As I've previously stated in a prior post, cost is on a per person basis. You can't define rules on what is, and what is not acceptable. That's just asinine. It's why I detest these threads to begin with.

And I can't own a lapdesk? Why not? BTW, my elbows are not at 90 degrees just to move my mouse. First, you can move the lapdesk forwards or backwards. Second, I can use arm rests and throw pillows. My arms are exactly at the same position they'd be should I use my gamepad.

I use a lapdesk with a kbm all the time, unless I'm playing a FPS which requires me to be close to the monitor for personal stat reasons. I agree, the couch is more comfortable, and that's where I play my PC games typically.
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
While I'd agree with this, I think it's only a part of why console gaming dominates PC gaming. Advertising and convention I feel are two key parts that could be argued to a degree could be as big of a factor as ease of use, especially considering that consoles are becoming more complex to use whereas PC's are becoming significantly simpler. (i.e. Every time I turn on my PS3, it seems like there's always a system update that needs manual attention, whereas games on Steam just update).

This might just be my cynical nature, but if you spend enough money you can get people to buy or believe almost anything. But I'm not really going to delve into this, as it's pretty evident for most people, and would just be way too long of a post.

Convention though is something that's horribly underrepresented. People buy games for consoles because they believe consoles are for games. They don't buy games for PC's because PC's aren't gaming machines. It doesn't matter if one can't run something else than it's advertised purpose, or run something other than it's advertised purpose better than a specialized machine. It's about perception.

People were brought up to believe you play games on consoles. Therefore, you play games on consoles. Hence, you teach the next generation that you play games on consoles, and the cycle repeats.

You are very correct on most of this. The fact is the biggest advantage consoles have has nothing to do with design, efficiency or all the other garbage people talk about and it has everything to do with a unified interest. You will never see M$ put their hard earned money up to advertise a big PC game, but you will see them partner with a dev studio to help advertise a big console game. For years and years no matter how big PC gaming became we would never see PC game ads on TV but we saw thousands of them for consoles. In the most basic sense the ignorant consumer does not know PC gaming exists and while people here may find that astonishing you would be surprised how many people just know absolutely nothing about it.

This is an issue PC gaming has known about for a long time it is basically called awareness. Many businesses have this problem and what they do is create organizations to pitch their product. One of the best examples is the got milk ads. Thousands of dairy related companies all pitched in a small amount of money and came up with an organization and it worked really well for them to help them fight against the larger soft beverage companies. So the question is why don't PC game companies do the same thing, the answer is conflict of interest. The organization that does this has members like M$ running the xbox, AMD in all consoles, and just about every other major console player in its ranks paying for membership and shooting down the best ideas because it may conflict with their console sales, even the big game studios that praised this organization like epic are hypocritical idiots. Fact is it is not going to work until they get those guys out or reduce their say or make them pay alot more. Maybe in the next console generation intel and nvidia will get fed up with the conflict of interest and go off and form their own organization consisting of only non console players.

This very thread highlights alot of issues that PC gaming companies are missing. For instance valve should be thinking hard about consoles and wondering if the combination of consoles and smart phones will eventually threaten their steam business model. Long term I would be thinking about that alot if I were valve and I would be taking a direct attack approach to making my product better for so it can appeal to more. That includes making steam respect windows dpi scaling so people can see the words on a HDTV.
 

roaf85

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,766
I have no clue what you are talking about. Of course extra equipment adds costs. They're called accessories, and these things exist on the console too. If a person wants a chatpad on their XBox, good for them. Regardless of PC or console, I'd rather have a better gaming experience than a worse gaming experience.

As I've previously stated in a prior post, cost is on a per person basis. You can't define rules on what is, and what is not acceptable. That's just asinine. It's why I detest these threads to begin with.

And I can't own a lapdesk? Why not? BTW, my elbows are not at 90 degrees just to move my mouse. First, you can move the lapdesk forwards or backwards. Second, I can use arm rests and throw pillows. My arms are exactly at the same position they'd be should I use my gamepad.

I use a lapdesk with a kbm all the time, unless I'm playing a FPS which requires me to be close to the monitor for personal stat reasons. I agree, the couch is more comfortable, and that's where I play my PC games typically.

You took the words out of context. I am talking about any lap desk and it isn't on a per person basis. Console gaming is cheaper, games have inheritant value. I am almost sick of typing and am think about doing a youtube video.
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
You took the words out of context. I am talking about any lap desk and it isn't on a per person basis. Console gaming is cheaper, games have inheritant value. I am almost sick of typing and am think about doing a youtube video.

Better record it on your console :D
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
All I have to say is that I bought a console on launch day with a 20GB drive. It has died twice because the Xbox was the most unreliable consumer electronic product ever however it was replaced twice under manufacturers warranty. I buy tons of stuff off Xbox Live and I still have that 20GB drive attached to it and also a 16GB flash drive I bought for $20 at Best Buy. No one really needs a 250GB drive, there are zero advantages to it other than storing all your games on it may make things load slightly faster.

$420 there with zero upgrades. Not bad for 6 years of gaming, and a system that play today's games just fine.

And like wise no one needs a $1500 gaming machine to play the latest games if they are willing to sacrifice quality and time as you have.
 

jonneymendoza

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
6,373
Also, i have gone through 4 consoles and had to buy the last one as the other one ran out of warranty.
 
Top