Brutalyst said:
You might be right (except for the return key part, I blame the website! :P).
But I have seen so many post and forums, which all came down to one thing...
"my PC does better than your new 'next gen' console"
and though right, as I was playing my 'next gen' console is that this is way better than what I had before. Which is what we strive for at a fundamental value. We strive to improve on what we had, at a console level, yes, it may not be at a level your PC is, but for a fraction of the price it still does the same thing your PC does, improve what I had before to a very noticable level. For a far less price and for more years than what the new item in your PC will. Granted the void will get bigger with time, but over a 8 year period a console will cost me a lot less than a PC. |
What do you mean? My PC is a few years old and is not even close to being on par with the PS4. Personally, I don't even care that much about "graphics"--and, according to statistics, I'm pretty typical.
My PC cost $900 new. Does that sound like a lot? Regardless of being a gamer, I would have bought a PC that cost at least $400 in order to do other tasks, so the "gaming" part was really just an additional $500 at the most. Does that really sound out-of-line with console gaming costs? Especially when PC games are much cheaper?
When you say "PC gamers", it seems to me that you're only talking about a few PC gamers. You're making assumptions that don't even apply across the board.
Personally, I split my gaming time between PC and consoles somewhat equally. Some genres, like fighting games or hack n' slash titles, and a lot of action-adventure games, I prefer on consoles. On the other hand, I wouldn't even think of playing a Bethesda or Dragon Age game on anything but a PC, not to mention extremely complex games like World of Warcraft.
I don't see any reason for elitism from either side. Both have their fair share of positives and negatives.
