Pemalite said:
I don't need too. Anyone can read between the lines and see what you were insinuating, doesn't take a brain surgeon!
Again, you're missing the point.
|
You're being awfully condescending for the person who is having everything said flying right over your head.
The point of what Intrinsic is saying is that when you make comparisons, it only makes sense to make them if you put them in similar contexts. Why compare what an expensive PC set up can do to a console that obviously uses cheaper hardware? No one is even contesting that PCs can do better. It serves no purpose and makes no point.
However, it makes more sense if you were to compare similar parts (or similar costing) from a PC to those of the relevant console counterpart and showing the PC running it at higher res, FPS, or whatever else. That's the point. it's about criterea, not about the actual comparing and contrasting itself.
Also, almost forgot to bring it up, but the reason why Intrinsic is only bringing up the entry cost has to do with how these comparisons look like to the eyes of the regular consumer. How we make our decisions on what to buy are completely different than them, because they do not go through the same process we do. Even some of us here don't completely do it (like going through the effort of actually building a PC, which is pretty much necessary to make a gaming PC on par or better than a console for a similar or cheaper price).
Do you think every single consumer builds their own PC, or thinks about how much money they could save on buying games in the long run when they pick their platform? Not really, usually they look at the entry barrier cost and then get what they can with the remaining money they can get.