By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Intrinsic on 02 November 2014
Edit Thread
bouzane said:


How about I put it this way. I have to buy a PC regardless of whether or not I am going to play games on it because there are no other devices with the capabilities of my PC. The only additional cost to make a decent gaming rig is the video card which added about $300 for my system, less than the cost of either game console. As far as performance goes, my PC is clearly superior to the XBOne and comperable / slightly superior to the PS4. The initial investment is the only major cost for PC gaming and no matter how much you try to downplay it you can not change the fact that I save money with PC gaming. Finally, not to offend but if you can't figure out how to pick out a handful of components and have a website like NCIX, Tigerdirect or Newegg build, test and ship a tower to your house there is something wrong with you, it really isn't very complicated. If it was complicated, you can always get somebody like myself to do it for you because frankly, I can put together a PC in mere minutes so it's really not an inconvinience. Finally, now that consoles have firmware updates, installations and pathces the "convinience" of console gaming isn't significant as far as I can tell. I had zero difficulty setting up my PC and haven't had any issues whatsoever.


Firstly, I have not once, tried to downplay that pc gaming is cheaper than console gaming. When considering the true costs og gaming. So to sayI am downplaying it is lander at best or misinformation.

And secondly, its even worse if you can't make your point without personalizing it or directly attacking me. Thats completely uncalled for. Even if you nicely start by saying no offence.

Everything you are saying though, still has absolutely nothing to do with the point of this thread. Or what people should or could do so they could also be playing on PCs or what not. Or how cheap games can be or can't be or how expensive console gaming is. I feel like this is the 100th time i am saying this. Even though I made this clear in my OP.

What this is about, is how games are compared. 

Can you tell me how everything you have said is relevant to comparing a game that is running on more powerful more expensive hardware (regardless of whatever reasons you have for buying the more powerful hardware, thats no ones business) to cheaper less powerful hardware? Thats what this thread is about.

That it makes no sense comparing a game running on a GPU that costs 4 times as much as the GPU in a PS4/XB1. And that if you were gonna comapre the game on PC to consoles then it should be a PC bought or built with the exact/similar cost of what it cost to buy the console hardware. So that way you are in the exact same price/performance class.

I think these are all just very simple things and couldn't be more straight forward. And shows how defencive PC gaers get wheneveer the price of their hardware is brought up even if the reasons for bringing them up are to help categorize the differences in hardware and not teh benefits of any suggested cost savings.

Whats funny is that I could even  make this whole argument by taking consoles completely outta the discussion. Let me try it. If you want to compare the performance of GPUs under the $200 price point. Will you include a Titan Z in that comaprison????