dude's legit
PCs are better than consoles argument tree
- Thread starter Krauser Kat
- Start date
- Status
dude's legit
I was Xbox 360 last gen, got 9 years into Xbox live gold and no regrets.
Much bigger community on Halo 3, Cod, Gears than any shooter on pc back then and even these days on blops 2, sure many 12 years old but many great friends met.
glassgannon
Banned
im not trying to champion either.
really rather not get into the bs debates/
////////
also i apologize for going off topic but since this thread is active and has a lot of pc gamers can someone suggest me a mid range gaming pc.
something that can run all modern games but doesnt necessarily have to beat consoles or max out everything or run everything at 60fps.
just something thatll run most game at playable settings and last me a year and a half or two.
Im just looking for an option and might consider investing more into it if i actually get into it later on
I am not a native English speaker. Please explain how "objectively better" is an oxymoron.
PC elitism like racism.
Only a tiny minority are vocal. The rest are very passive-aggressive/subtle about it but refuse to admit being elitist.
More_Badass
Member
Not at all. Got a $400 laptop for school and it can run everything from most indie games to Crysis (on medium) and MGS V (on high). If you don't mind not having the ultra graphics or whatnot, you don't need a crazy expensive rig to enjoy PC gaming
¬_¬
the Pc master race stuff started off as a humerous joke, then the PCMR subreddit happened and took it way too seriously :/ they ruined the joke by beating it into the ground.
PC is my primary platform, but I own a WiiU and PS4 too. The WiiU has had some of my favourite games this generation PS4's had a few hits, but not enough exclusives I enjoy to justify it
you can drop a 750ti into the majority of pc's and it will perform on a similar level to the PS4. its a great time to be into games
Shuggananas
Banned
$400 plays MGSV on high ? with what, 12 FPS ?
Have the honesty to link it at least
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I don't really know how Dishonored runs on PS4 and I'd rather not play that game at all, but let's assume it still runs in a way that it is enjoyable and also assume I'd like this game then yes, I would. I would buy Commander Keen 1-6 on a disc without any extras for 60 for any console even though I already have the PC versions.
More_Badass
Member
15-20+ FPS
30+ if I drop the settings to medium
MGS V is a bit of an exception because it's so insanely well optimized
I can play Elite Dangerous and Tomb Raider on High, Crysis and Far Cry 3 on medium, etc.
Then again, I don't care about frame rates or graphics
If I ever make a family with kids and we all love videogames, the last thing I would do is a gaming PC to play Arma 3 "with" them.
This sounds almost disturbing to me.
glassgannon
Banned
15fps is what you deem playable for a game thats meant to run at 60 on consoles?
do you play powerpoint games too?
not caring about fps is a damn stupid reason to state a $400 laptop runs mgs v on high,
What? More disturbing than your 9 year old child spouting profanities over COD on Xbox LIVE? I'll take the competent father and daughter combo on Arma any day over that brat kid.
paperspace
Member
Arma 3 is the only PC game? I don't even get the point of this.. and the person you replied to was just stating that he was playing that game.
The first guy didn't, the 2nd guy sure did. You even quoted him...
paperspace
Member
I'm referring to the original poster, 'DMTripper'.
As am I, lol. Mabufu clearly threw the "with" them in there on purpose. I wasn't replying to tripper, i was replying to mabufu
More_Badass
Member
Ha, trust me, I've seen games that run like a slideshow. MGS V is perfectly playable. I'm actually about 10 hours in ATM. But I usually have the graphics on medium.
And what does this have to do with what I said?
If I ever find my son spouting profanities on CoD, I would cut internet over a couple of weeks and give him a serious talk.
He said "kidS" and "we all love". I cant imagine Arma 3 in a PC being a family game.
Arma 3 gaming aside, what I mean is that I cant understand how having a family who loves videogames, a PC can be prefered over a console, when the consoles have a clear lead on the local multiplayer thing.
I would get it if DMTripper is the only one who plays and his family likes to see him tho.
glassgannon
Banned
yeah im just saying its not the best example to give....
paperspace
Member
Of course Arma 3 isn't suppose to be a family game, it's a military sim, but do some families play them together? Yes. And how is that disturbing? Because it's so flabbergasting that a child can learn such a complex game? COD isn't a family game, but by the looks of it some parents make it seem that way by letting their little brats on, right? What I am saying is, of all the little kids on Arma, they more are well mannered and behaved and more competent than the little dumbshits on COD.
paperspace
Member
How is that? There are way more local multiplayer games on PC than on any console. And support for a wide range of controllers.
Now that you say it...
I was worried about kids playing a war game like Arma, since I think there are better games suited for them (obviously not COD), but if playing Arma, they play with more matture people and less rat kids, well, I guess that's a good thing.
Because steam have a lot of indie trash?
The best indies are in PS4 already, and there are A LOT OF THEM. I dont think the quantity difference is important at all.
And yes, local multiplayer on consoles is a lot better and easy to set up than on PCs, even if you can do it on PCs.
I dont think this is debatable.
derExperte
Member
You can do lots of things in ArmA that don't involve killing dudes. Some use it to just hang out with their buddies, train formations and stuff.
Statistics about the average age of PC gamers say something entirely different, no need to make things up. Especially in a forum that would jump at everyone who would say 'consoles are for kids, you grow out of them', though this whole thread is filled with weird misconceptions you'd never get away with the other way around so whatever.
But back to the time thing, on PC getting to the gameplay is faster 99% of the time, my PC boots faster than my PS4, I have a convenient sort- and taggable text-based list of >100 games on which I double click instead of a short row of icons that can't really handle more than 20, then basically no load times because SSD. You can put them into consoles but they can't utilize them fully, the differences remain significant, like I remember that Bloodborne patch for the load times, everyone was excited but they were still abysmal. If there's an unskippable intro a quick Google search might show an easy way to remove it. More saved time in the long run. PS4's sleep mode is nice if you only play one game at a time but I don't, many don't. Settings? On average not even a one minute investment once per game. I won't touch any multiplats on consoles anymore but when I watch streams, quick looks or whatever I'm always noticing how much downtime there is. Not as bad as last gen, holy shit is it a time investment to get through my PS3 backlog, but still. Convenience? Sure, yeah, I'll give consoles that if you limit it to 'put disc in, do nothing else, play (eventually)'. More actual game time? Absolutely not.
When did Speedrunners get a PS4 release? Local multiplayer has become a complete non-issue on PC, it was a few years ago but we get a constant stream of high quality content (just saw that Jackbox Party Pack 2 released) including exclusives which are easy to play.
Statistics about the average age of PC gamers say something entirely different, no need to make things up. Especially in a forum that would jump at everyone who would say 'consoles are for kids, you grow out of them', though this whole thread is filled with weird misconceptions you'd never get away with the other way around so whatever.
But back to the time thing, on PC getting to the gameplay is faster 99% of the time, my PC boots faster than my PS4, I have a convenient sort- and taggable text-based list of >100 games on which I double click instead of a short row of icons that can't really handle more than 20, then basically no load times because SSD. You can put them into consoles but they can't utilize them fully, the differences remain significant, like I remember that Bloodborne patch for the load times, everyone was excited but they were still abysmal. If there's an unskippable intro a quick Google search might show an easy way to remove it. More saved time in the long run. PS4's sleep mode is nice if you only play one game at a time but I don't, many don't. Settings? On average not even a one minute investment once per game. I won't touch any multiplats on consoles anymore but when I watch streams, quick looks or whatever I'm always noticing how much downtime there is. Not as bad as last gen, holy shit is it a time investment to get through my PS3 backlog, but still. Convenience? Sure, yeah, I'll give consoles that if you limit it to 'put disc in, do nothing else, play (eventually)'. More actual game time? Absolutely not.
When did Speedrunners get a PS4 release? Local multiplayer has become a complete non-issue on PC, it was a few years ago but we get a constant stream of high quality content (just saw that Jackbox Party Pack 2 released) including exclusives which are easy to play.
The point being that it wasn't really a funny joke even in the beginning, since the folks making it originally were apparently totally tonedeaf as to what it was referencing, or how it might be taken.
Now, I haven't said anyone here is a Nazi, nor do I think that, I just think that the 'joke' is kinda gross and shows a complete lack of awareness.
Lockman_321
Member
Just gotta say i bought a ps4 at launch and had a crapy laptop at the time so never played any pc games. Anyways fast forward to june this year and i finally decided to upgrade my laptop and was planning to buy the top spec macbook pro. My friend convinced me to spend that money on a gaming pc instead and i do not regret the decision one bit.
I find myself buying most multiplatforms for pc and the only reason i bought fifa for ps4 is due to all friends having it on that platform.
I also have a wii u but its literally for 3 games.
Cost wise consoles are better but i hardly find myself turning on ps4 anymore unless its for netflix. In fact it annoys me that i have to get call of duty for ps4 due to mates as i would much rather be playing on pc using my 1440p monitor.
I find myself buying most multiplatforms for pc and the only reason i bought fifa for ps4 is due to all friends having it on that platform.
I also have a wii u but its literally for 3 games.
Cost wise consoles are better but i hardly find myself turning on ps4 anymore unless its for netflix. In fact it annoys me that i have to get call of duty for ps4 due to mates as i would much rather be playing on pc using my 1440p monitor.
More_Badass
Member
We're going off on a tangent here, but wasn't the whole "master race"/Ubermensch notion originated by Nietzsche? The Nazis distorted it but they didn't invent it
Got both a X51 (with recent 970 upgrade) and a PS4 sat under my TV both have their merits and both have their faults.. but you get best of both worlds, cannot really see the point on arguing over which is better.
The ideal solution is to have both if you can afford or justify it to your other half.
The ideal solution is to have both if you can afford or justify it to your other half.
Well since this is subjective that can be your opinion, do you mind listing your favourite indie games on ps4 anyway though?
The best indie games ? I don't see Undertale, care to elaborate ?
Of course all plateform have their awesome exclusivity. This is the only reason why i will buy a PS4 sooner or later. PS4 misses also a lot of very good indie from PC Gaming. (I don't like to say "Steam", Steam doesn't represent the whole number of game you can play nowadays)
Nothing to do with it but is the argument "but you can emulate those console" really used that often ? I mean, i'm not someone which NEVER use emulation, far from that but for new console it seems it's going a little too far.
It can be my choice to give Nintendo money for their new Zelda in order for them to make other games i like. If I don't do that, it can't work. Why the PC would be a better plateform if it means the one i want to give money don't have it at the end ?
Also... Never totally understood why the mouse was so much better for shooter... Maybe because i like better a more careful/slow approach of shooting than the PC crowds, coming from Perfect Dark and such ? Maybe...
Many people will never have the money to buy a high-end PC at any point in their life. No exaggeration. They will never have £300 lying around, let alone £600+. I think "why not both" is an outlier argument, because it's so much money.
I'm very lucky. I do make enough to allow for this lifestyle. So I have both last-gen consoles, a PS4, and a high-end PC. But I am insanely lucky to have my income (which is still only low-tier middle class) and I value it as a hobby, so I have a high-end PC.
For many people - probably the majority who own a platform - only one at a time is financially justifiable. This is why console wars are such a big thing in the first place. Money is limited, so people self-justify their commitment (because it is a big commitment).
Don't disagree with your post, but what bothers me is the sidestepping on that page around the 'development' part of the tree.
Of course consoles are easier to develop for. Saying 'they're less powerful' is besides the point. Power has nothing to do with how easy something is to develop for. Before a game enters production, the team will plan which platform(s) they'll release it on. If they want to release it on console, they'll be fully aware of the power ceiling. And they will develop based on that.
Developing for console, they know with 100% certainty that every single console has the same features and the same capabilities. They don't need to optimise for lots of different hardware variations or scalability. The consoles are one-size-fits-all. They design to one remit, and one remit only.
It's easier on console. From my perspective, that's an objective outcome. Clearly PC is the better platform in terms of performance and freedom, because the upper ceiling is massive, but in terms of development, I think it's a given that console is easier.
That game only shows the sad state of the AAA Industry on PC.
Again - you go for the "console better than PC angle" when that isn't even the point I'm making to your prior comment
I was psyched for the Steam controller too, but early feedback suggests it's still shit for precision shooting... so back to square one
FPS Games
"I feel like the number one question people will have for this controller is, “How does it do with FPS games?” After all, that is one of the most popular genres around and one where the divide between controllers and keyboard and mouse has been most prominent.
In short really good.
I will honestly probably always be coming back to Team Fortress 2. It's gaming comfort food to me.
I played Team Fortress 2, Borderlands 2, Fistful of Frags, and even went old school with Star Wars: Republic Commando.* Here is my main takeaway from these games: technically, I feel like yes, playing with the Steam controller is not as precise as a keyboard and mouse. I know this should be the case.
But it did not feel that way.
Even when playing multiplayer, every death and every kill felt fair. I never thought, “Darn, if only I had a mouse and keyboard.” Sniping, in particular, felt like an improvement. Lining up shots by feeling your way over the target felt more natural than playing with a keyboard, though twitch aiming is undoubtedly not as accurate.
Playing older games like Republic Commando felt wonderfully modern with this controller. While finding a comfortable button configuration did take some figuring out, once I did, this became my preferred way to play.
And for the record, I went back and played Call of Duty: Modern Warfare,* which if you may recall in my previous post, I had difficulty unlocking the “Hardened” difficulty with the controller. Well, I did it with this one, so that says something."
derExperte
Member
I think he meant best local mp indies.
I can agree with this, my main issue was the 'embracing' which sounded like everyone did but you cleared that up.
Yes, it wasn't a new concept. Nietzsche became mentally ill and couldn't do anything anymore by himself which led to his sister taking over everything. Unfortunately she apparently was a big fan on fascism and started to distort and misrepresent his works. It's more complicated in that she wasn't the only one taking advantage of the situation but kinda became the lone scapegoat. Sad story.
Right now you're probably right but I don't know if the average dev trying to make sense of the PS3's architecture would've agreed. You can totally design a console that's a bitch to develop for and new development tools have made it easier than ever to develop PC games.
I can agree with this, my main issue was the 'embracing' which sounded like everyone did but you cleared that up.
Yes, it wasn't a new concept. Nietzsche became mentally ill and couldn't do anything anymore by himself which led to his sister taking over everything. Unfortunately she apparently was a big fan on fascism and started to distort and misrepresent his works. It's more complicated in that she wasn't the only one taking advantage of the situation but kinda became the lone scapegoat. Sad story.
Right now you're probably right but I don't know if the average dev trying to make sense of the PS3's architecture would've agreed. You can totally design a console that's a bitch to develop for and new development tools have made it easier than ever to develop PC games.
It feels like most threads devolve into value arguments and trying to explain that PC gaming has changed a lot in the post Steam era. You wouldn't know unless you tried it. If you don't like the value proposition to begin with, you're probably never going to try it. Shame because, as pointed out earlier, there's more to it than 144hz/4k AAA games cranked to the max.
I never knew PCMR was such a big deal. It's one shitty corner of the internet, with most of it appearing to be satire. I'm sure there are some dead serious dedicated console bashers but it's hardly a representative group.
What?
My daughter plays skyrim with a shit ton of mods and the binding of Isaac. My son is playing counter strike and dark souls.
Is this OK?
Phreakuency
Banned
I play both. Best of both worlds I guess.
There are some amazing experiences you can only get on console, some only on PC. It will always be that way.
My PC is still a beast and can handle anything at max settings and smooth frame rates but I still play my PS4 much, much more.
There are some amazing experiences you can only get on console, some only on PC. It will always be that way.
My PC is still a beast and can handle anything at max settings and smooth frame rates but I still play my PS4 much, much more.
Damn straight.
PC's high benchmark for superior simulation and the bonus of super-customisation doesn't guarantee better experiences. Sometimes developers really push the envelope when they focus all their resources on one standardised platform - eg The Last of Us on PS3. (Push the envelope in terms of design and quality of game, not simulation.)
Again, can we stop pretending High-end PC gaming is the only sort of gaming on PC?
Most people can enjoy TONS of PC game with any PC they have at their home.
You can be both a console and PC gamer with no extra expense. PC gaming scales not just upwards, but downwards as well. You can play plenty of indies and "mid-tier" titles on the hardware most people have at home. This is also PC gaming, Y'know.
paperspace
Member
It's absolutely debatable. Quantity is the only objective matter we can discuss, as quality is subjective -- but even then, we can find a lot of local multiplayer games on Steam with great reception. Over 125 titles with over 80% positive reviews. Perhaps you've played all of them and think they all are trash, but that's still subjective!
It's not as clear as you may think.
How do we know it's not representative?
Guilty until proven innocent. Alright.
roadrunn3r
Member
And I thought misinformation and anti pc agenda was becoming a thing of the past... until I read this thread. Some people never change.
I'm not pretending that at all - and I agree with you - but that point is irrelevant to this argument. This argument is defined by comparing PCs directly with consoles (and, by implication and relevance, current-gen consoles). It's not a generic 'what can I game with' discussion. By default, ITT, the PCs under discussion are scaled up to the level of consoles. If people want to play only 2D/older/indie games on their lower-end PC, or buy one of those, then all the power to them - but that factor doesn't have a place here.
From my experience, a console-matching gaming PC was still going to cost me £400-500. More than a new console after recent price drops. I know this because I built a PC last month, for the first time in 10 years. This was custom-building, too.
Add in the whole fucking headache of building the thing - which took 9 hours for me, first time - and it is not a worthwhile option. If I'm going to buy a PC I'm going to go for the highest benchmark to make that building time (and the purchase) as worthwhile as possible.
glassgannon
Banned
Mid range gaming pc suggestions gaf?
i dont need to go above 1080 or max everything out.
im thinking (970+i5 4690k)
what else do i pair it with.
and is the jump to a r9 390 worth it considering the price difference?
and exactly how do you decide the motherboard?any criterias?
can someone point me to something cheap?
sticking to 8gb ram and will upgrade that if necessary.
not looking for too much quality, just something thats gives the best value for money and lasts a bit.
i dont need to go above 1080 or max everything out.
im thinking (970+i5 4690k)
what else do i pair it with.
and is the jump to a r9 390 worth it considering the price difference?
and exactly how do you decide the motherboard?any criterias?
can someone point me to something cheap?
sticking to 8gb ram and will upgrade that if necessary.
not looking for too much quality, just something thats gives the best value for money and lasts a bit.
Indeed. I had my other PC from 2007 through till 2013. It cost me £680 to build from scratch and was relatively mid/high end of the spectrum at the time. I upgraded in 2009, 2011 and 2013 - all for a total of less than a console subscription per year. Basically I saved £40 towards an upgrade each year. Selling off the old component and pickup the new ended up at less than £80 every time, and it wasn't necessary for me to upgrade, just my particular preference. That total cost with the low pricing for PC games has made it cheaper for me to game than if I'd gone through the console route, especially since many of the components continually move to the next system at no cost.
Alas, due to medical expenses I sold it and rely on a 2011 laptop for gaming right now - and I can still play the current titles without issue, recently going through GTAV, MGSV and Alien Isolation.
The point being, that the PC doesn't have to conform to the very high end or the very low end or what graphics capabilities exist of the console of the moment; it's completely flexible to the person. This is also true for pricing, where to shop etc.
- Status