Let's Clear Up Some Video Game Myths!

[vlad321]

superchunk said:

vlad321 said:

People spent $600 for a console 5 years ago (for that money you can make a PC that shits over both consoles)..... Furthermore $10 is not "insignificant" considereing that for every 5 games you can buy a new free one as compared to the consoles. Considering since over the last 5 years I have bought around.... 30? games, I have saved myself around $300 than if I was shelling out $60 for them. There is no way you can argue it's more expensive (I do hope you decide to add in a monitor to the cost, because I'd love to slap those expensive TVs to the cost of a console and comfortably say that consoles are expensive as compared to PCs).

Currently consoles are 1/2 of a base computer. So price is always at best equal.... when a console first launches... then PCs are always more expensive. Are they more powerful, sure but they have different primary purposes too.

$10 reflective initial price is not always. Not all games are cheaper on PC out the gate. Some are equal. Then there's the used market which is very hard to do with PCs as their stuff has far more content protection than console games. Additionally, I have yet to pay more than $40 for any game and I always resale them as their resalability is always retained as there is no one use code for consoles.

As for the TV argument... well that's just stupid. Many PC gamers use the same TVs as monitors.

As for lifespans... you're crazy if you're going to tell me you've not upgraded your GPU in 3 years time. See that's the biggest difference. PC gaming almost requires to to spend a couple hundred every few years and then during a normal new gen cycle a whole new machine for at least a couple hundred over the cost of a new console.

Whatever you may save on full game cost (if you only buy new on launch), you easily eat up and then some on hardware costs.

Only real benefit is that its an actual computer and has a ton more capabilities and any home will usually own one anyways. But look at purely gaming use... consoles are simply cheaper and easier for the mass consumer.

Very true indeed. But nonetheless, about 2 years after a new console generation comes out, you can get more bang for you buck from a PC.

Also the $10 is very much true. I can count the number of games that cost $60 on my fingers.As I already said, I have saved myself $300 or more just by buying PC games and not console ones. I can literally buy myself a new console with the money I have saved on games. Then we can get into new controllers and stuff and the picture gets grimmer for consoles. However if you want to go into deals, then I play my Steam Sales card and tell you right off the bat I get around 20 games for $50 (most of them good too), and automatically win. Ultimately, you save more than you waste on a PC if you make a cheaper one.

As for upgrades, I have not upgraded my GPU in over 3 years (well, I got a new one last summer but before that I had a 4 year old GPU), so there, I disproved your entire point. You really just need 1 machine per console cycle, build one about 2-3 years after it starts and then you can point and laugh at people still using the underpowered hardware of consoles. Also, if you are trying to insinuiate hardware failure rate in there as well, I suggest you look at the laughable hardware failures of this gen, and how much worse they are than just regular PCs.