dsgrue3 said:
Vetteman94 said:
After reading this thread I am really surprised people are so confused by this concept. I thought the OP and sales did a pretty good job explaining the situation. In a 1 vs 1 comparison, if one of the consoles doesnt have a specific game/feature, it is a +1 for the console that does. You cant disregard a console for being able to play a game because "that thing over there thats not in the comparison" has it as well.
Most people that buy PCs don't consider if it will play games as a factor in buying it unless that's what they want to do with it, because they probably don't care to play games on them. The ones that have a PC as a viable gaming option purchased it for that reason, but you can't use that as a blanket argument for everyone with a PC. People buy consoles because it is a simple and dedicated way to play games. And in most cases PC isn't an option for them. |
Your argument (along with Sales2099 and the OP) falls on deaf ears because it is utterly fallacious to suggest that a majority of gamers don't have a capable PC.
|
Its just as fallacious to suggest the opposite as you are doing. Because you are also saying they have the willingness to play games on PCs, which again you can't say they all or even a majority have. The ease of use of a console will sway gamers to using it over a PC for games. Plus you have to also take into account what their friends play as well, people arent going to game on a PC if their friends are all on 360 or PS3. So PCs dont matter in arguments like this.
