CerebralTiger
Member
Why not factor in an estimate for the depreciated worth of those components you got 2 years ago? That should make things fair enough.
PC: The Largest Threat to Next Gen Consoles (according to Gametrailers)
- Thread starter EternalTruth
- Start date
Why not factor in an estimate for the depreciated worth of those components you got 2 years ago? That should make things fair enough.
Tidus_Great
Banned
considering a ps4 launches for 400 dollars and plays most of whats on PC i cant see most people caring about PC when they can play all those games on something cheaper.
This. PSN+ on the PS4 is bullshit, and it is shameful how it has come to be an acceptable practice.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
Well if PC is the largest threat to consoles, I guess they have absolutely nothing to worry about then.
What?! I wonder how I got Batman Arkham Origins for $36 and AC4 for $35? And even with EA games GMG give you $10-12 credit or $8-$10 cash back for your purchases. You are COMPLETELY wrong.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
How much will it cost to get one as powerful as a PS4, will it play disc(that don't require online activation), will it have a retail presence at all? Why would a average gamer go near those things?
Yup, PCs are a better value in the long run then a console. It's very unfortunate that people are so excepting of paying for online. "Xbone is worse" is not a valid excuse either.
But i bought this PC for current gen games ...
But whatever, whole PC cost me 750$ [case and PSU excluded].
The only reason i can upgrade it for 300$ to twice the performance of next-gen consoles, is because next-gen consoles are generally quite weak.
These juniors have been hitting it out of the park these past few weeks. Just glorious comedy.
ccctrlaltdelete
Banned
Let's start with something easy to run.. how many ps1 games can the ps4 even play.. how about ps2 games, or gamecube, or wii, or n64, or snes, etc. etc. How many mmos are available on the ps4? How many mobas like Lol are there on the ps4? Can you play strategy games like starcraft 2, rome 2 total war, shogun total war, etc.? Are you really sure the ps4 plays as many games as a pc? How is backwards compatibility working so far on the ps4 anyway?
ChiefofCitadelSecurity
Member
Dude, I know lol I'm just saying most games are made for them. Those exclusives it has are either not too flattering(low-budget/niche genre) or intimidating.
Stuff like this too. If they can get it for cheap good enough is fine.
Looks like it could have potential and the whole shit sounds awesome as fuck, but the scenario is so blurry right now. Like Carmack said it's not completely inconceivable.
Well, it really depends on which genres you favor.
If you are a fan of JRPGs and third person action titles, buying a console for exclusives is the logical choice. Hell, even FPSers nowadays are either exclusive to consoles or launch on the PC as well. Rarely is an FPS exclusive to the PC, though.
And obviously if you like MMOs, F2P games like LoL, or strategy titles the PC is going to be a better choice for exclusives.
TouchMyBox
Member
ShootingB1anks
Banned
To me it's about playing in the living room with a 55 inch TV. Yes I could hook up a beast (game rig) to the TV but I don't want to move my PC into the living room. The only thing that might compete is the steam box for the living room space.
Now for the bedroom, nothing beats a gaming rig equipped with a space heater (GTX780) during the winter time. Also, graphics wise, the next-gen consoles have already lost to the PC.
Now for the bedroom, nothing beats a gaming rig equipped with a space heater (GTX780) during the winter time. Also, graphics wise, the next-gen consoles have already lost to the PC.
cobragt4001
Banned
Stalker series, Planetside 2, Arma 2, Arma 3, Shadow Warrior, Rise of the Triad, Crysis 2&3 and Team Fortress 2 [on consoles those are different games, sorry].
Xbox 360 had PDZ and Halo series = 5 games
PS3 had Resistance and Killzone series + MAG = 6 games
PC has as many exclusive FPS games as both consoles combined ... And i'm not even counting games like DayZ, Battlefield 3 or Blacklight Retribution
OldAsUrSock
Banned
That's harsh.
I never got PS+ because I already owned the games they gave away. If there were games that I did not own, I was not interested in them anyways. Sony fans never add PS+ to their console's cost even when it is mandatory. You can still play games on PC and online without buying a separate OS.
If this was true then console gaming would be absolutely dominating in territories that are lower on the socio-economic scale. But that isn't the case, it's actually the exact opposite of what the real world shows. Consoles are a play thing of the rich.
This happens every console cycle, the PC is booming at the end of the cycle as people are bored of their consoles, the graphics leap is quite obvious and so on.
In 2 years time there will be mind boggling exclusives only on Xbox One and PS4 which the PC simply doesn't have. Doesn't make the console superior but the PC is no serious threat.
Even now, with PC gaming, Windows standards, hardware standards as good as they are, it's STILL not even remotely close to the convienience of a console. Buy, plugin, play. Sure you get better frame rates, better graphics on the PC, you can do more - the question is, what do you want out of your gaming?
Yet another internet PC vs Console shitfight, let the PC gamers enjoy their PC games, let the console gamers enjoy theirs.
In 2 years time there will be mind boggling exclusives only on Xbox One and PS4 which the PC simply doesn't have. Doesn't make the console superior but the PC is no serious threat.
Even now, with PC gaming, Windows standards, hardware standards as good as they are, it's STILL not even remotely close to the convienience of a console. Buy, plugin, play. Sure you get better frame rates, better graphics on the PC, you can do more - the question is, what do you want out of your gaming?
Yet another internet PC vs Console shitfight, let the PC gamers enjoy their PC games, let the console gamers enjoy theirs.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Honestly, with the way console gaming is moving towards AAA cinematic tripe on one had and twitch action competitive online on the other, all marinated in the stink of DLC microtransactions and Anti-single player garbage, building a gaming PC is becoming more and more like a No-brainer. Access to games that date far back as the 80's, cheap games via steam, performance where you can mandate 60fps whatever developers shitty vision, modifications, fangames and expansion packs for little to nothing.. Why the hell not?
It still has a couple major gripes though that for the time being consoles still have the edge for me though...
Not enough Action games
Not enough fighters
Awkward to play in the living room compared to console
PRICE.
But more and more Im starting to not care. There are plently of indie and smaller fighters popping up, Action games are dying on console as well, Im no tech noob so ill work through setups to get my games running and the Modual nature of the PC means I can upgrade bit by bit.
The PS4 is going to be my last console. As things are trending, I cannot see myself buying another gaming console after that. I will never subscribe to gaming as a service and while Im no fan of DD at least with steam and PC in general I can game for pennies compared to what Id have to pay on console.
For me, not only is PC gaming a treat to my console gaming, its actively coming for its throat.
Oh and that rise in indie gaming replacing the mid-tier? Never going to be as prolific on console as it is on PC and on PC, indie gaming is SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper.
It still has a couple major gripes though that for the time being consoles still have the edge for me though...
Not enough Action games
Not enough fighters
Awkward to play in the living room compared to console
PRICE.
But more and more Im starting to not care. There are plently of indie and smaller fighters popping up, Action games are dying on console as well, Im no tech noob so ill work through setups to get my games running and the Modual nature of the PC means I can upgrade bit by bit.
The PS4 is going to be my last console. As things are trending, I cannot see myself buying another gaming console after that. I will never subscribe to gaming as a service and while Im no fan of DD at least with steam and PC in general I can game for pennies compared to what Id have to pay on console.
For me, not only is PC gaming a treat to my console gaming, its actively coming for its throat.
Oh and that rise in indie gaming replacing the mid-tier? Never going to be as prolific on console as it is on PC and on PC, indie gaming is SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper.
SneakyStephan
Banned
8 years you say? So your ps4 actually costs 800 euros not 400.
For that kind of dough you can build a pc that shits on ps4 performance wise.
You'd save hundreds and hundreds of euros on games as well over 8 years. You'd save more than enough to upgrade your gpu and cpu to better than ps5 performance for free by the end of those 8 years.
PC stores will build your pc for you for 30 euros btw, if you are scared of playing legos yourself.
Console gaming is more expensive, deal with it
You can argue about subjective stuff like exclusives and if you rather play dota 2 or uncharted, x rebirth or killzone, rome 2 or gears of war, r factor 2 or gran turismo or forza or w/e
They're not really worth discussing since they are a matter of preference.
But console gaming is more expensive than pc gaming at console performance for those who don't currently own a pc at all, and for those who already have a hard drive or a quad core pc or any other parts the cost for going into 'next gen' only further favors the pc.
You have the option to spend as much extra as you want to get even more performance and leave ps4 far behind.
Also you say second hand games, I say sales that are cheaper than buying second hand games and full backward compatibility , while being able to enjoy the benifits of your new hardware on your old games.
If buying a ps4 allowed you to play your ps3 games like uncharted 2 at 60 fps 1080p with better textures and a bunch of AA you would LOSE YOUR SHIT, scream it off the rooftops and rub it into nintendo/xbone user's faces.
Yet on pc that is how it's always been, but shhh don't mention that
3 years from now: Buy the uncharted HD collection now on ps4 for only 49.99$....
But which games are these people playing? Typically they are not graphically-intense games that demand new and expensive hardware.
nelsonroyale
Member
Really? PC gaming has quite a lot of draw backs as well. For me it is bulk and utility. I use a PC for work. I don't want the problems that gaming brings.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
I'm not the one who tends to discuss semantics, but man. This isn't a country club, just economic.
Yeah, I had debated going back to edit the post. Growing up, though, the kids who were into PC gaming (at least, insofar as the hottest titles were concerned) had expensive rigs and lived in expensive neighbors. I had to go to a friend's house if I wanted to play Doom 2, or Diablo, or MechWarrior. And it took me forever to own a system that could handle Unreal. And Crysis....
SneakyStephan
Banned
You seriously have no clue.
Tribes: ascend
Quake live
Stalker series
red orchestra series
Arma series
Hawken
Shadow warrior
rise of the triad
planetside
then there's a whole bunch of f2p shooters that are popular but that I'm not going to dignify by name because they're almost as bad as console shooters
Then there's the multiplatform ones that only exist on consoles as a token port, because noone in their right mind wants to play these on a controller
-serious sam 3
-team fortress 2
-css/cs go
I've never heard anyone claim that fps games are the territory of the consoles, but this is neogaf so there is always one...
The people you are arguing against in this thread all have consoles alongside their pc btw. Your mention of gears of war would ring as hollow to a pc only gamer as the mention of red orchestra or stalker does to a console only gamer like you.
They play any game they're interested just like the rest of us. There's not some special store of plebeian games for poor people that only they're allowed to play. Hell I'm no Mr. Moneybags (more like Pennybags) and I can afford a decent rig. By the way, graphics aren't the end all be all for PC gaming. You can have a PC that's $500-$800 (and 4+ years old) and still play everything that's come out.
You don't NEED to max everything out. There are tons of diminishing returns on settings that'll let you "max" a game out. I usually start with just lowering shadows from the highest setting to medium. There's usually no noticeable difference other than the 15+ fps increase. Then start dropping that Anti-Aliasing incrementally and that'll give you a lot of frames back.
PC gaming isn't some fantasy for only rich people. That is unless you have an inferiority complex and feel constantly forced to upgrade to feel better about yourself.
It's always been that way. I really don't see that changing until we see a really simple solution. The Steambox could be that, but at that point you are just getting into fragmented consoles. Which is fine by me, but I don't think the majority of the console audience wants that. They want really simple. The desktop will always attract a large audience for the browser stuff, but I don't think those audiences are going to overlap considering the difference in fidelity and content.
I'll concede that PC is still the domain of FPS MP. Personally, I strongly prefer m/kb control for shooters. The only exception being Crysis 2, which I played through on PC with a 360 controller. I was thinking more along the lines of exclusive campaign shooters like Halo 3, Halo: Reach, Halo 4, Killzone 2, Killzone 3 , Resistance 2, Resistance: Fall of Man, Perfect Dark, etc.
On the PC, the STALKER series is the only one that I felt consoles were missing out on. And it's debatable whether that really qualifies as a "shooter" at all. It's certainly not an action shooter like the console examples above.
On the PC, the STALKER series is the only one that I felt consoles were missing out on. And it's debatable whether that really qualifies as a "shooter" at all. It's certainly not an action shooter like the console examples above.
Fair enough. Not really a point I want to argue about. The important thing is that consoles are missing out on an excellent series here.OldAsUrSock said:
you forgot haze.
Nope, intentionally left that one out haha.
Halo 3: ODST, Battlefield: Bad Company, Goldeneye Reloaded, and Far Cry Instincts are worth adding, though.
OldAsUrSock
Banned
Don't forget about PS+ unless you just want to ignore online for EIGHT years.
OldAsUrSock
Banned
Do you shoot in STALKER? Yes, so it is a shooter.
Console = pay less upfront but more in the long run.
PC = customization at the cost of research and education of how to customize.
PC is a boon for those who are willing to put in the effort to gain the most value out of their games. Consoles are great for those who don't want to put any effort into their hobby.
PC = customization at the cost of research and education of how to customize.
PC is a boon for those who are willing to put in the effort to gain the most value out of their games. Consoles are great for those who don't want to put any effort into their hobby.
A shame people aren't willing to put in a little bit of effort though cause this forum even has a good thread where you can ask all the help you could ever want if you want to dabble in PC gaming.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Since there seems to be a few PC heads in here, can someone explain the main advantages/ disadvantages of AMD/NVIDEA?
Never quite understood that particular pissing match.
Never quite understood that particular pissing match.
Nvidia has more stable software to go with their cards, Nvidia also owns more technology which they won't share, 3D vision / Physx / G-Sync and more, Nvidia is seen as the big bad company that charges insane prices when AMD is unable to compete which has been the case for quite a while.
AMD has better better price / performance but is widely accepted to have worse software to go with their hardware though they claim to be fixing alot, AMD now has Mantle which gives console optimization on pc for the engines that support it, only Frostbite so far (everything EA), Mantle is believed to be usable by other companies but that's still up for discussion. AMD is seen as the underdog, giving better prices combined with performance that comes reasonably close to what Nvidia is offering and sometimes even beating it.
The whole compatiblity argument makes no sense though, no reason at all games won't suddenly freak out or simply won't work just because AMD is powering the next-gen consoles especially given the fact that most next-gen games use PC as lead development platform.
I can personally say i own an Nvidia card and have had no issues whatsoever with that game, doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things, it could be a driver issue or something wrong with that gpu, i wouldn't immediately jump shit over it that's for sure, artifacts on the screen can also be a sign that your card is dying.
I would advice you to wait and look at reviews for AMD's new line-up and see how they compare before you go and spend your money, they claim to have solved quite a few issues with it that were plaguing AMD users.
I haven't been able to play Tomb Raider using my GeForce GTX 670 in months. Stupid game either artifacts over the entire screen or crashes outright. So frustrating. I plan to buy AMD next based solely on the fact NVIDIA won't be powering next-gen consoles. I don't want to deal with further compatibility issues.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Ahh.
Nvidea it is then. If im paying through the nose for a GPU, last thing i want to worry about is stability. Thanks.
gigantor21
Member
That list could've easily been cut to 5 with more general umbrella terms (PC, mobile, etc.).
I agree with the general idea though. I suspect it'll take longer for people to ease into next-gen, and there's no way each box will sell at least 80 million this time. That's probably never going to happen with dedicated gaming consoles or handhelds again frankly.
I agree with the general idea though. I suspect it'll take longer for people to ease into next-gen, and there's no way each box will sell at least 80 million this time. That's probably never going to happen with dedicated gaming consoles or handhelds again frankly.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Nvidia is salty. AMD is not.
I can vouch for this statement.
MutonCommander
Banned
This fact works almost entirely in the PC's favor. You still can't upgrade your console, you still can't mod it or play traditional PC games on it due to the controller situation. Consoles are much closer to PCs architecturally but most barriers that keep PC gamers away are still in place.
Meanwhile, the PC is getting console-like optimizations through Mantle, a living-room friendly form factor with SteamMachines, an easy to use interface with Big Picture and a controller made for comfy couch gaming of all PC games.
In the next year the PC will move closer to the console space than ever before. There are still a lot of unknowns but one thing is sure, a lot of people are going to start wondering if they even need a console anymore.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Here's a useful answer instead of shitty memes and jokes:
Nvidia:
+better drivers (not a bit better, a lot better, nvidia only users' anger at 2-3 games having problems in the past 2 years attests to that, I WISH it was only two games for me)
+better open gl support
+supports downsampling (this way you can have real AA in games that don't have a proper AA solution built into the game, which nowadays is about 80 percent of games)
+supports SGSSAA, another good AA method alternative
+ has physx support (gimmicky particles and cloth tacked on in games)
+shadowplay: game recording using the gpu to encode the video, which means you can record with no real performance hit , this is only relevant if you are someone who makes videos of their games, uploads to youtube or streams on twitch
+ lightboost support (eliminate the terrible motion blur of lcd monitors if you have a 120 hz monitor)
+supports the new gsync thing for monitors, which eliminates screentearing (I will not dignify the lag/stutter part, noone should play with normal vsync on to begin with), which is a really promising meaningful change in how monitors work
+better support for multiple gpus
+consume a bit less power/ performance
-costs on average 30 percent more because fuck consumers they will pay anything if there's no real competition
-rather weak compute performance (gpgpu stuff like gpu physics and whatnot )
-doesn't support the mantle API (see amd section for what it is)
AMD:
+cheaper
+better compute performance
+overclock well
+this mantle API, which right now is unquantifiable, once it's used in some games we will be able to judge it until then we really don't know if it's the best thing since sliced bread or a fart in a bag or anywhere in between
+amd have been working on making their crossfire drivers better
- (and this is my biggest gripe, drivers aside): no viable AA solution to make use of the performance in older games or less demanding games or the average modern game
So I think their higher end gpus (7970ghz and up) are only an option for those with 120hz monitors or multiple monitor set ups (where you have a real use for that performance)
-drivers have been really bad from 2010-2013, it has been better in the past 6 months but it's way too soon to tell if that is just a statistical anomaly or not, I have been soured on their drivers, personally.
Other people who play different games may have had a better experience
-missing the proprietary stuff that nvidia has like physx and lightboost, also no shadowplay for recording (can't remember if they had an amd alternative right now)
-won't be able to use the g sync monitors (well you can use them but not use the variable refresh rate from g sync)
At the lower-mid end i'd probably recommend amd, even though it's a gamble on drivers imo
If you play a lot of older games,definitely go for nvidia (no real aa support on amd to make them look better, there's only SSAA and the amd version has not worked for me in a lot of games, and the performance cost is huuuuuuuge, too huge for something like a 7850 for example)
Whatever you do ,do not buy a gtx 660ti 2GB, that card is a one off with a crippled memory bus, a bad apple.
At the mid-high end (7970ghz and probably 290) you choose between a better price, or AA support
I wouldn't buy either tbh.... fuck nvidia for overpricing, fuck amd for not having an AA solution (seriously, what the fuck is wrong with them)
At the high end (290x) I don't see the point of this gpu unless you have multiple monitors or a 120hz monitor, and we have no idea what the price will be yet or where the high end nvidia prices are going in the next week, need to wait and see.