| adriane23 said: a $10 keyboard and mouse (especially wireless) is not comparable to a PS4 or X1 controller. If you're going to get things on the cheap that aren't comparable, you might as well get a cheap graphics card. |
Uh what? If you wan't comparible, buy a console controller.
The keyboard and mouse will *never* be comparible to a console controller. - The Keyboard and Mouse is arguably a more responsive and accurate control method.
There is also nothing wrong with a $10 keyboard and mouse if you're on a budget.
Heck, I've sunk thousands into my PC and after my $100 Saitek Cyborg RAT mouse died after 6 months of use, I instead used a $10 mouse that I got from kmart and it works fine.
There are parts that you need to sink your cash into and others that don't so you get the best price/performance, but that's just logic. Otherwise everyone would spend $400 on a 1200 watt Power Supply Unit even if their PC only consumes 25 watts.
| adriane23 said: The point of the comparison is to make a PC that can rival a console, so that also means it needs to be conveniently operational in a living room like a console is. That means the microphone needs to either be wireless, or connect to your controller of choice. |
No it doesn't.
Stop moving the goal posts.
You might need it, not everyone else does, but you would be the exception not the norm in that regard.
| adriane23 said: There are less than legal ways of obatining everything, so that's pointless to bring up. Again, I have to bring up convenience. Right now (and probably for a good while longer), Steam OS and especially Linux now that Steam OS is being pushed by Valve are not viable options because most games don't run on them. |
You should have read my post regarding WINE and DosBox, Steam already has games that run on Linux.
| adriane23 said: You're right about the peripherals, but the same could be said for consoles in terms of PSUs, graphics cards, and CPUs. Once you buy the console, that's it for at least 5 years. They will be the main focus of 90% of developers, and always optimized for. |
The difference is, once you have a PC, you can play all past games and future games, one system to rule them all.
Consoles you need multiple consoles of differing generations, lets say you bought 2 generations of consoles, that's at-least $800 right there, just for the basic machine, no games, no accessories.
An $800 PC would play both generations and as you upgrade you can repurpose the hardware or sell it off to recoup costs.
Converesly the price you pay just for online access is enough to pay for a graphics card upgrade every few years, go figure.
| adriane23 said: I'm not trying to put PC gaming down, because I also game on my PC, I'm just trying to point out the sillyness of trying to price match consoles. And if you're gaming on a PC, you should be trying to outperform consoles (by a lot), not match them. Don't be ashamed to pay more for better performance. |
That's just opinion.
Everyone is different, some people don't care about performance and some people don't care about graphics. (I.E. Nintendo proved this with the Wii.)
The PC gives you the option of both, cheaper with less graphics or pay for more and get better graphics and choice is never a bad thing.
You're not dictated by a multi-billion dollar company who charges for every single facet of the device and adds on a "games tax" to every game sold, wanna spend more? Go ahead, but you don't have to.
You could spend less than this build and happily play the latest games if you sacrifice graphics.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
