Putting the PC cost argument to rest

[VanceIX]

Intrinsic said:

VanceIX said:

amak11 said:
The problem when people bring up this argument, they think "it cost this much to upgrade". They don't think the average consumer knows nothing about gaming PCs. The initial investment is significantly more expensive than a console. But the pay-offs are only higher graphical fidelity and a higher frame rate.

So cheaper games, all 7 generation worth of games, mods, and free online are nothing now?

This value proposition you keep bringing up. The world doesnt work that way. Its just like when people were saying "hey for $600 you don't just get a PS3 you get the worlds cheapest blu-ray player and free online multiplayer and this or that"

People DO NOT CARE. The primary thing that the avrage consumer cares about it the sticker price. The cost of entry. Not some proverbial you save this or that much over this or that much number of years. Its like electric cars. You buy an electric for $30k today you get tax incentives of as much as $7500 on that purchase. Then you also save as much as $1k every year on gas (or lack of it so to speak). Yet you don't see them flying off the lot, cause they are still "too expensive" for the average consumer. Yes, you save more in the long run with PC gaming, but people just don't care about that. Especially when you consider that "people" here are basically the kinda people that will buy no more than 4-6 games per year and most of those games will be CoD, Madden and/or FIFA. 

 

Electric cars are still more expensive since you have to replace the batteries so often, and the performance is identical or worse to normal cars, so that's a poor comparison.

And the reason I made this thread is to show the value. I'm trying to show how cheap it can be if you look past the sticker cost.