GameSpot tried to build a Pc which costs around the same as a console.

[MikeRox]

Ruler said:

- just because the ps4 and x1 are locked at 30 frames doesnt mean they cant do more. In assassins creed 4 its obvious that the ps4 is equal to performance to the amd rig. The ps4 could equally hit 42 frames per second @1080p but the developers locked it 30 to reduce any huge frame rate drops and 30 and 60 frames are the most efficient rates. 40 isnt looking so good i have read somewhere.

The key thing here though which you've phrased perfectly in favour of PCs. On consoles, the developers make the decision for you as to what YOU would prefer your game to be like. On PC, you can choose. Want the frame rate? Sacrifice the graphics and effects or resolution etc. Prefer the higher detail? take the frame rate hit. Much more control on the users part. Alternatively, if you want both, shove a few quid more in your rig and boost it's capabilities.

The expense of this is, when you pop your game in your PS4, that's as good as it will get, this can be viewed as "hassle free" or "restricted" and the option of an "endless" upgrade aspect, whilst console gamers HAVE to wait for the generation to end. Depending which side of the argument you're on, you're always going to maintain that view. However, all I know as I've been a console gamer primarily since the late 90s when the Dreamcast smoked my PC both graphically and in terms of software, is that my mates who went PC in the mid-late 00s, are still using that same spec and are able to run XB1/PS4 software on it meaning their units have been cross generational for the multiplatform stuff.