Oof...that exaggerated price ... it hurts

I already said I was including the console version in the first few replies guys ...

If I would go pc I would not half ass it. Either 4k/60fps everything or not at all. And if I want to play games like Oddesey in 4k/60fps with everything on max it is not going to be cheap. Everything below a RTX2080TI is half assing it in my perception. Which already costs €1350 where I live. 

To me that kind of outlook is usually just an excuse to inflate PC prices for console wars, although maybe you just have a weird perfectionist mindset haha 

I built my PC for like $1500 and that was for EVERYTHING (including overpriced peripherals, monitors, etc). Without those, it would have been like $900. That was back in Feb 2016, and the card I chose was a 970, which was already almost 2 years old at this point. The 970 is 4 years old now, and it can still handle new triple A games at high at 60+ fps. Most triple A games from this gen are 75-90fps on it, and a few of them even 100+. This is all through a 144hz monitor, too, so the refresh rate is way better. (By the way, funny how monitors are always included in PC prices but not TVs for consoles) 

I won't lie and say that 4k on PC isn't still hard for a majority of people, however you have to consider the criteria is extremely different. On PC the criteria is 60fps, 4k, and also ultra settings. That isn't really fair, because if you want something equivalent to a PS4 Pro (which has most games checkerboard and also has games at 30fps most of the time with low quality assets) then the price is obviously way different. So in a way, what you're saying kind of doesn't make sense. It's half assing it to have realistic expectations? No matter how much you pay, you aren't going to get Raytracing 4k at highest quality assets at 60fps. That's not realistic, but consoles don't even attempt any of those benchmarks (well, the Xbox One X does do real 4k, and it's exclusives are 60fps but I think they use variable resolution and also in games like Halo 5 the frames for the enemies can drop significantly which is very noticeable). 

Anyways, I wouldn't say you need to go to an RTX 2080Ti or else you're "half assing it". For the forseeable future, 1440p at 144hz is a better investment (although really I'd just wait for the second series of RTX cards). 

My build is just over 2k and tbh, I find 60fps+ and 1440p with higher settings to being my more desired and sought after offerings over 4k 30/60fps. 4k 60 isn't even sought after by most on PC anyway, so it's not even the rule.

To me that kind of outlook is usually just an excuse to inflate PC prices for console wars, although maybe you just have a weird perfectionist mindset haha 

I built my PC for like $1500 and that was for EVERYTHING (including overpriced peripherals, monitors, etc). Without those, it would have been like $900. That was back in Feb 2016, and the card I chose was a 970, which was already almost 2 years old at this point. The 970 is 4 years old now, and it can still handle new triple A games at high at 60+ fps. Most triple A games from this gen are 75-90fps on it, and a few of them even 100+. This is all through a 144hz monitor, too, so the refresh rate is way better. (By the way, funny how monitors are always included in PC prices but not TVs for consoles) 

I won't lie and say that 4k on PC isn't still hard for a majority of people, however you have to consider the criteria is extremely different. On PC the criteria is 60fps, 4k, and also ultra settings. That isn't really fair, because if you want something equivalent to a PS4 Pro (which has most games checkerboard and also has games at 30fps most of the time with low quality assets) then the price is obviously way different. So in a way, what you're saying kind of doesn't make sense. It's half assing it to have realistic expectations? No matter how much you pay, you aren't going to get Raytracing 4k at highest quality assets at 60fps. That's not realistic, but consoles don't even attempt any of those benchmarks (well, the Xbox One X does do real 4k, and it's exclusives are 60fps but I think they use variable resolution and also in games like Halo 5 the frames for the enemies can drop significantly which is very noticeable). 

Anyways, I wouldn't say you need to go to an RTX 2080Ti or else you're "half assing it". For the forseeable future, 1440p at 144hz is a better investment (although really I'd just wait for the second series of RTX cards). 

Qwark said: 

 Also why would I want a PC that's equal to a PS4 pro.

In the end I play too little videogames to make that investment, by back to the topic if we don't consider pc a special category its totally fair to compare Battlefield V totally maxed on pc to a PS4 exclusive. I would even say that's the only fair way since we probably also use the PS4 pro version instead of the base PS4 version. 

You wouldn't, I'm just saying that the criteria are so different for a 4k console for a 4k PC that it almost defeats the purpose of the "price" argument. But you're not making that argument, you're just saying that if you jumped into PC gaming you'd want to go all out, which is fine.

Also, I don't get why we keep making the distinction between DICE games on PC and on consoles? Again, a DICE game on consoles is still fairly comparable to a PS exclusive. Being on PC would just make the fight very obvious. 

Fair enough I agree that Dice games are pretty comparable to PS4 exclusives. Last year I did prefer Horizon over Battlefront, but that's mainly due to the artstyle. This year I would give BFV a good chance, because whilst GOW and Spidey are graphically very solid, I don't they look quite as good as Horizon thanks to that gorgeous Decima engine.

Detroit on the other does look really amazing especially the character models, so for me it will probably between those 2 at the end of the year if I compare the PS4 pro versions of those games. 

At least we can agree it's a fair comparison : o : ) 

Hm ... I thought God of War was more impressive than Horizon but a lot of people told me otherwise ... I should really replay it. God of War for me would be 1st so far, cause I haven't seen BF5 in action myself. I have a Pro but no 4k HDR TV though :( 

Eh. The Titan Xp is far from half-assed. No doubt, the 2080Ti is an excellent card, but it isn't needed to achieve  4K/60fps and you don't even need that to have a stellar experience far above what consoles can provide.

Really, I'll never get the hype for that over 1440p/120-144Hz. But then, that's me. When I can comfortably bang out in 4K @ 144Hz, the tune will change. For that, I'll wait for something more powerful than the 2080Ti. Then again, I'm not jumping on that bandwagon anyway. Cards that provide an optimal (read: 8K/144Hz) experience is where I'll be dropping my dollars.