JimmyRustler
Member
PC is only the best plattform if you know your shit with hardware and software. Otherwise it's way too time consuming.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Why the PC Should Become The Home Base for Every HardCore Gamer
- Thread starter nbthedude
- Start date
Yeah, but I absolutely hate buying stuff digitally.
But that doesn't matter anyway since most of the games I'm interested in aren't available on PC.
1st Course
Member
Nah looks alright to me. Maxed Metro 2033 w/4xMSAA is probably the most demanding game on PC atm, I will be surprised if he can keep steady 30 FPS let alone 60. 60 FPS or hell even 120 FPS is not a problem, you can easily achieve 60 FPS in any game by simply just dropping the settings to high/medium/low etc. Having a good IQ is what really hard to achieve, especially with the way modern game engines acts towards MSAA. Crysis 3 is the biggest guilty of this recently, you add 4XMSAA and suddenly your FPS drops by like 15-20 FPS.
RibbedHero
Member
With such niche tastes you're obviously not a "hardcore" gamer. Most hardcore gamers play a broad range of genres, many of which are only available on PC.
This kind of comment always reminds me of the old 16bit wars. I had both a SNES and a Genesis and loved both. I had a friend who always told me Genesis sucked because it "didn't have any good games."
The difference is he loved Zelda but didn't know Landstalkers existed. He liked Contra but never heard of Gunstar Heroes made by the same team. He never heard of Phantasy Star, had no idea there was a pretty cool Castlevania game exclusive to the system.
I knew about those games because I had the platform so I was seeking out experiences on it that interested me. There are so many amazing games on PC (and not just indie games, though there are a ton of those) that I had no idea existed before I built my PC 3 years go. that is because I wasn't visiting PC sites, I wasn't paying attention to PC releases, etc.
There are over 3,000 games on Steam alone. PC has the largest library of any platform anywhere. I find it hard to believe that people dont' think there are any games on it that would interest them. They just don't know because they dont' have a gaming PC so they aren't paying attention.
They are examples of games I and many others had many problems with.
But here are some more if that's what you want:
Skyrim - Sutter problems in ATI cards that made the game almost unplayable. I had to download a fucking video-recording program to limit my frame-rate to 59 fps in order to resolve this problem, it took me a whole day to find the solution.
Tomb Raider - Awful performance with TressFX on any card. Constant crashes on Nvidia cards even after the patch that should have resolved this.
Metro games - Microstuttering - just check the performance thread. And you want all the eye candy like AA? Well than the game says: "Fuck you, get a Titan".
Rage - I don't think I need to say anything about this one. Specially since I had an ATI
GTA 4 - Terribly optimized for the graphics it has.
Crysis 1 and 3 - Where are your 60fps with awesome IQ that the OP speaks of in these games? Unless you have a 5k € you are stuck with lower settings if you want a butter smooth framerate.
Not to talk about lame ports that cap the games at 30 fps and you need 3rd party programs to unlock it and shit like that.
There are also well-optimized games, no doubt about it. But in my opinion and experience, I have more problems then not, specially in high-end games.
Here is the part I don't understand about the argument. I totally get not knowing how to fix something and not wanting to fool with it. I hate car problems. I dont' know shit about cars and it just makes me mad when my car breaks. I don't want to fool with it ever. But I'm not a car enthusiasts. If I were, I'm sure I wouldnt' be happy when my prized car had a problem, but I sure as hell wouldn't go "fuck it, I hate cars" when it did because I was invested in it.
It's only one of the points that I tried to lay out in the OP among many, but I think the part of the "Build it yourself" that I perhaps didn't emphasize enough was the full control and customization. I don't really know how anybody who is a game enthusiast would not like to have those options. Don't like like the frame rate? Tinker and fix it or just lower some settings. Or upgrade your rig. Hate the stupid weight limit on the inventory and find it arbitrary? Go get a mod to fix it. Have a weird glitch or a problem? Use google, find a message board where someone posed some weird fix that works. With PC you have options. With console your only option is "Maybe they will patch this." But even if you don't want to tinker, you have that option too. Put the game on "medium" settings and just go play.
So, what're you going to do in five years when the hyper-niche console games you're interested in are only available digitally?
Well, that's true. One of the weirdest phenomenons to me is people's adversion to just dropping some settings but yet saying "I'll go play on console instead."
I dont' know why so many people are afraid of "medium." If you don't want to tinker with anything or worry about upgrading, "Medium" is just the thing for you. If you build a decent gaming PC and put anything at all on "Medium" I can almost guarantee you an ice smooth experience 90% of the time out of the box. Medium settings on a PC today is still usually much better looking than the console equivalent. Heck, a lot of 360 and PS3 games are upscaling from sub-720p resolutions.
"Medium" settings needs it's own advertising campaign. It seems to have a public relations problem. Maybe they should rename "Medium" to "Console Enchanced" or "Smooth & Solid."
Because, IMO, "Medium" settings doesn't justify such a costly purchase.
And also because "Medium" is not the "Holy promise of the PC land" that everyone talks about.
That's the problem, the biggest argument for the pc is always " 60 fps with Amazing highquality graphics without any jaggies".
You buy a pc counting on this, and then you have to play the game either NOT at 60fps, or at 60fps but on "medium" - unless of course you spend a much bigger amount of money. The promise is actually a lie for the most part.
Chû Totoro
Member
I tried PC gaming...
- it ends up to be very expensive (hardware)
- only a few genres are very well represented (most of which I don't like).
- a lot of devs / editors don't make games for PC so I'll miss way more games this way than the other way
- BC only for PC games... emulation is borderline piracy (I highly doubt all the people who are playing emulators are using their games... and for old systems you must use ROMS so you don't use the game)
- not fun for multi-player when not online (and I personally don't really like to play with people I don't know and I'd rather have a good time at my place with my friends not only playing video games but also watching a movie, eating, or playing cards after gaming session)
Good for a lot of people but not for me.
- it ends up to be very expensive (hardware)
- only a few genres are very well represented (most of which I don't like).
- a lot of devs / editors don't make games for PC so I'll miss way more games this way than the other way
- BC only for PC games... emulation is borderline piracy (I highly doubt all the people who are playing emulators are using their games... and for old systems you must use ROMS so you don't use the game)
- not fun for multi-player when not online (and I personally don't really like to play with people I don't know and I'd rather have a good time at my place with my friends not only playing video games but also watching a movie, eating, or playing cards after gaming session)
Good for a lot of people but not for me.
The inconsistent frame time issue with AMD cards is well known. Skyrim is the worst offender with this issue as well. You have a good point there.
......so turn off TressFX? A new tech in a brand spanking new game needs time to mature.
Why do you *need* all of the eye candy with AA cranked up? Even a smidge of AA at 1080p/1440p looks amazing.
id's communication with NVIDIA and AMD did royally screw up this game during launch week. That sort of thing happens on all the systems though. Day 0/1/2/3 patches to fix performance issues are par for the course on a lot of AAA games that are pushing hard for a release date.
Totally.
I don't know what you're talking about here.
1080p, medium settings (which means really fucking pretty), on $150-250 cards. That's smooth gameplay at significantly higher settings than consoles.
I hate this too. Every single UE3 game I have to go into the binaries to hack my 120hz/8.3ms frametimes by enabling Frame Smoothing and setting the max to 120. But, the fact that this option exists to me in the first place is glorious. Someone highly invested in their hobby should know how things work.
I think you've done a pretty good job of nailing the outliers here. These are the big offenders, and its just a tiny handful of titles. For every AAA game that has its quirks and issues with performance, there's another 10 that work amazingly well.
I can't think of a single game that I haven't been able to achieve consistent 8.3ms frame times or lower with good settings at 1080p with my 7970. Same with my 670. The 690 has given me more trouble than anything though, swapping that out for a Titan this week
I know for me the coolest things about PC gaming are the ability to customize your system, the amazing amount of indie games and unique software, mods, and the insanely cheap floor for game prices and the other features I layed out in the OP. You'll notice I didn't use "cutting edge graphics" or anything similar in the arguments I laid out. It was more about openness, customization, software availability, etc.
Everybody likes nice graphics, obviously. But you are getting caught up on a descriptor. "Medium" in a game like Crysis 3 is going to blow the balls off of "Ultra" in Binary Domain. And "Medium" in Crysis 3 is also going to blow away the console version of the same game.
I don't buy a PC or PC parts with the expectation of maxing out every thing forever. If anybody sold you that "Holy Promise Land," yeah it's bullshit. I don't know who is promoting that notion, though or why it is important. Sometimes, I think if developers just renamed "Medium" "Soul Crushing Awesome Sauce" 90% of players would be playing games on that setting and be none the wiser about the graphical differences.
That's totally me. Though I think they should rename 120hz the "Soul Crushingly Awesome Sauce" setting.
I know a *lot* about hardware and building PC's. If you were to ask me what MSAA or FXAA even stands for though, I'd respond with a blank stare.
It becomes a smaller amount of money than consoles though over the life. My Xbox 360 was $400, my Xbox Live for the past 7 years was $350, my average cost of new releases on Xbox was $60 while on PC they can be almost always be found for $40 or less. If my PC costs $1200 and comes with free online and $40 games and I buy 1 game per month, how many months does it take for the PC to become the cheaper alternative than Xbox through a console generation?
$400 + $350 + $60m = $1200 + $40m
m = 22.5
So basically in less than 2 years if you buy 12 games per year, the PC has already become cheaper than the Xbox, now factor that out another 5 years and the PC is saving you $240 per year which ends up with another $1200 in savings over the remaining 5 years.
Do not underestimate the savings of paying $40 or less per game instead of $60, no matter how much more expensive that initial hardware was.
The PC will not become a go to game machine until, it basically becomes a console (Steambox), I'll give some personal reasons below.
1. Immediacy : It doesn't need extra BS requirements and hoops to jump through to play. I can handle a firmware update every now and then, but windows updates with BS all the time and ruins my excitement when all I want to do is play a game.
2. Bigscreen/Couch/Livingroom: The last thing I want to do when I get home after working at a computer all day is... be on a computer all night. Stream Big Picture is a step in the right direction, but ultimately is inconvenient because it excludes games and because its still in its infancy requires that I have a keyboard/mouse handy to handle when a game doesn't support BP or I get a pop up, or w/e else.
3. I don't like M&KB : I grew up playing games using a controller (since Atari 2600) and really detest using a M&KB to play a game.
4. 55 Inches of Awesome, True Surroundsound: Again, unless your got your PC hooked up to your main Ent. System (which as I have said above is less than optimal) you will not be taking advantage of two of the best most expensive pieces of hardware in my home. I love my TV, and surround system, playing games on the PC robs me of these.
1. Immediacy : It doesn't need extra BS requirements and hoops to jump through to play. I can handle a firmware update every now and then, but windows updates with BS all the time and ruins my excitement when all I want to do is play a game.
2. Bigscreen/Couch/Livingroom: The last thing I want to do when I get home after working at a computer all day is... be on a computer all night. Stream Big Picture is a step in the right direction, but ultimately is inconvenient because it excludes games and because its still in its infancy requires that I have a keyboard/mouse handy to handle when a game doesn't support BP or I get a pop up, or w/e else.
3. I don't like M&KB : I grew up playing games using a controller (since Atari 2600) and really detest using a M&KB to play a game.
4. 55 Inches of Awesome, True Surroundsound: Again, unless your got your PC hooked up to your main Ent. System (which as I have said above is less than optimal) you will not be taking advantage of two of the best most expensive pieces of hardware in my home. I love my TV, and surround system, playing games on the PC robs me of these.
Jin
Member
It is not a lie for me. I personally have not experience that many problems you have with so many titles. I would quit PC gaming if that happened to me. The only thing I can relate to is the Treefx in TR which I have turned off.
Even with "medium" setting it is still way ahead of current consoles simply for the fact that you're gaming (I presume) at 1080p.
You forgot to factor in how many people have bought 2 or 3 xbox 360's
Those threads make me sick.
Felix Lighter
Member
Who is promising 100% 60 fps performance on every game on the highest setting? I haven't seen anyone make those claims. For a good number of games, is perfectly and easily achievable. Some games take some tweaking and some games are either simply too demanding or poorly optimized. If 60fps at high settings was somehow automatic, why do you think there are so many settings to adjust?
Also, going into PC gaming just for better looking/performing console ports is such a waste in my opinion. That is only a part of what makes the platform great. I will be the first to admit that you are giving up convenience in a lot of cases when you decide to game on PC but your trading convenience for control and flexibility. First and foremost, the openness of the platform should be your draw and if those aspects don't interest you, be sure to fully understand what your getting into.
Usually its as simple as turning off Ambient Occlusion or turning down AA from x16.
No one is going to really notice their absence, yet they are very demanding.
Those are 120Hz panels. Real 120hz, not the gimmicky BS on TVs.
5400x1920 resolution. At 120hz.
I play on my 65", I sit across the room, I have a wireless keyboard w/trackpad if I need to navigate something but once in game, it's all controller.
I don't bother with Windows Updates most of the time. I think it downloads them into the background but you can turn off all the notifications and just update it when you want to. You can also set it so that it automatically does this stuff in the background at certain times late at night for zero impact.
I like the cost savings. Between Xbox Live and $60 games, not to mention having to buy another system because it doesn't last 7 years, I've spent far more money on Xbox gaming than my PC gaming would have taken, and that includes all hardware purchases. But when you save at least $20 per new release and even more on older games, the savings add up to pass right on by the initial financial hit of the more expensive hardware.
Alcoholikaust
Member
I love couch PC gaming with or without a m/kb, in 3d on a massive tv in surround sound... but I agree with Reson8r: very cumbersome and not not user friendly. Still in its infancy
Doesn't your PC do this automatically if you use it for more than ten minutes a day? I toggle between Mac OS and Windows, downloading regular security updates for both, and I've never had to sit on my hands and wait for a system update to download before I play a game.
So what did you do when Nintendo went from Atari's joysticks to the thumb pad? Wasn't that a pain in the ass? And what a bout analog sticks? Fuck all the times I fell off a ledge in Mario 64 trying to get a grip on that noise. And what about then DUAL Analog sticks. A lot of time playing Halo staring at the ground while running. If you are gamer and have been for a long time, I'm pretty confident you have adapted to various control mechanisms. You have the ability. And I say this as someone who plays 80% of my PC games with a controller.
I'm grouping these two together under the "America: Fuck Yeah It's Big" category. As you have outlined Steam Big Picture mode is getting there. I won't take anything away from it. I have a nice 55" Panasonic Plasma that I quite like myself. But I will say that it kind of bums me out that people automatically assume that bigger, louder, brasher, is always better. Sitting in a chair staring at 23" monitor in the dark with a good pair of headphones can be one of the most immersive and intimate gaming experiences you will ever have.
I'm not trying to take away from your desire to slouch in a couch and have big trucking things violating your ears and eyeballs until you disappear into a pool of sedated, over-sensitized goo. That's an experience alright. And it's one you can replicate on a PC. It's just not the only one, nor is it necessarily the best.
When has user friendly ever been a major concern for enthusiasts? We're not talking about making it easy for people who casually enjoy playing games, or even spending a lot of time doing so in this thread.
Felix Lighter
Member
Windows updates are far less disruptive than console firmware updates. Driver updates can take a bit more effort on the users part but they usually aren't necessary for the majority of games. People keeping up with drivers are doing so because they can eek out a little more performance out of some games or maybe add a feature but for the most part you can ignore them unless there is a specific issue with a specific game.
Come on. Read the rest of the forum. PC gamers are no different than the rest of the population here. Some are aggressive and rude, some try to be helpful and understanding and others fall across the spectrum in between.
Come on. Read the rest of the forum. PC gamers are no different than the rest of the population here. Some are aggressive and rude, some try to be helpful and understanding and others fall across the spectrum in between.
Palette Swap
Member
Add XBMC to the OP and you're golden.
1). Make sure you have a 1080p monitor
2). Get a $15 wireless 360 pad adapter
3). Get an appropriate length HDMI cable for television (30-75 ft)
4). Duplicate displays
5). Start game on PC from m/kb and play on television with controller when setup
or
1). Bitch about PC gaming
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Truth bombs.
Yes I'd say the majority of all the pro PC posts here are doing a good job on demonstrating it's strengths in relation to console gaming.
What I'm talking about is that I don't want to play Crysis 3 on "medium" at 30-40 frames per second.
Maybe you don't care that much about the graphics or don't notice the difference,, but I do. And if I spend 1000 on a PC it's because I want to play games on their highest settings, not on medium.
Come on man... how many posts have you seen on GAF of "PC's shits on consoles because you can play at 60fps with pristine IQ" ?
It's the main argument for the PC. It might not be yours, but you can't deny that the graphic fidelity is the main argument for getting a PC in general.
Anyway like I said this isn't even my main problem with PC gaming. My biggest problem is all the headaches that come with it in terms of getting a game to run well on your machine. Like you said it is an open platform. It's prone to have this problems.
That's why I want to go back to consoles, PC it's just not for me, the pros don't balance the cons, once again - for me.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
They're not outliers judging the by the gaf performance threads and official forums.
CosmicQueso
Member
I picked up an Alienware X51. Windows downloads and installs updates in the background. I never see them. The new Nvidia software does the same, and now even automatically optimizes the settings for a number of my games for my system. The X51 is sitting in the spot my 360 used to. It's hooked up to my big 55" Samsung. I press the Xbox button on my wireless controller and big picture mode starts up and I have all my games right there, always updated through Steam, ready to launch at my whim. I have a wireless kb/m too but they mainly are there when I want to do other stuff.
I mean, really, your objections are based on old data. These things were obstacles in 2009, maybe even 2011. But in 2013? Nah. And I'm imaginging the steambox will make it even easier.
This thread is about why every hardcore gamer should have a PC as his home base. And it starts with the assumption that everybody who's an enthousiast gamer, generally also likes to build PC's.
The reason that so many people react on that assumption, is because it's a bad assumption. When a lot of people point out they disagree, it's probably because it's not a general mutual interest.
No, your plumbing thread is a bad analogy because this thread is not about people sharing or gathering PC building tips.
joeygreco1985
Member
How much did those 5 panels cost all together?
And bezels running up the screen every 5 inches is annoying as fuck
i have my pc hooked up to my 52 inch TV. steam boots up automatically with windows and holding the 360 home button takes you right into big picture mode. on the rare occasion i need it, i have a $40 logitech wireless mouse/ keyboard set i keep stashed away. keyboard goes on my lap and the laser mouse works perfectly on my couch. the benefit of different control options outweighs the minimal effort in setting it up IMO
That's good, because you don't have to. A 670 is a good 40% more powerful than the cards I linked in the graphs above. Medium =/= Medium either. Just because a box can go higher doesn't mean that the current setting is bad. Crysis 3 medium is ridiculously pretty.
You're right, and I think it has to do with being the one thing that a lot of people can relate to.
For me, it's the ability to browse, do social networking, sit in my custom mumble server chatting with friends with sound quality nearly good as sitting next to the person, play games, create content, stream games, watch live esport matches, and have 120hz all on the same machine.
You can't do all of that on any other device.
chickdigger802
Banned
pc games at medium+ look way better than console games, but funny enough, pc games settings from medium to ultra, pretty much are indistinguishable at a glance (varies per game of course). side by side, it's obvious, but slightly softer lighting isn't crazy obvious.
So yeah, you don't need 4 Titans to have really great looking pc games.
GRID 2 just came out and it can be maxed at ultra 60 fps with a 560 ti (I think?).
PC as home base makes sense for me. Now that the majority of games these days are multiplatform, it's natural that I want to play them at the best. There are maybe a handful of exclusives on consoles per year, so my consoles are my '1st 2nd 3rd base' for those specific games.
And how do people actually game on the coach? When I slouch on the coach, my reaction time drops drastically. I need to be on the edge to really focus, which is no different on my office chair.
So yeah, you don't need 4 Titans to have really great looking pc games.
GRID 2 just came out and it can be maxed at ultra 60 fps with a 560 ti (I think?).
PC as home base makes sense for me. Now that the majority of games these days are multiplatform, it's natural that I want to play them at the best. There are maybe a handful of exclusives on consoles per year, so my consoles are my '1st 2nd 3rd base' for those specific games.
And how do people actually game on the coach? When I slouch on the coach, my reaction time drops drastically. I need to be on the edge to really focus, which is no different on my office chair.
I did like the occasional PS3 exclusive this gen, particularly the Uncharted series. But for the longest time now my 360 and ps3 has been gathering dust. I exclusively game on my pc now. There just isn't a compelling reason for that to change from what I can see, going into next gen. I may pick up a ps4 at some point when its cheap enough, I don't know yet.
I like the pc because of games like Might and Magic, Path of Exile, Fallen Enchantress, STALKER, the extensive back catalog, modding, Steam sales, GOG, etc. Looking at some of the replies in this thread I think I've been very lucky because 95% of my play time is spent playing, and 5% is spent configuring stuff or downloading drivers. And the time spent doing that is minimal, something like 10 minutes at the most and it happens rarely.
All platforms have their respective strengths and weaknesses, its just that for me the pluses of being a pc gamer far outweigh any minuses. YMMV of course, I know pc gaming isn't to everyones taste.
I like the pc because of games like Might and Magic, Path of Exile, Fallen Enchantress, STALKER, the extensive back catalog, modding, Steam sales, GOG, etc. Looking at some of the replies in this thread I think I've been very lucky because 95% of my play time is spent playing, and 5% is spent configuring stuff or downloading drivers. And the time spent doing that is minimal, something like 10 minutes at the most and it happens rarely.
All platforms have their respective strengths and weaknesses, its just that for me the pluses of being a pc gamer far outweigh any minuses. YMMV of course, I know pc gaming isn't to everyones taste.
Last Baron
Member
This is the first time I've seen second post completely miss. They're usually so on the mark...
You looking for a full list of games? i can give you a good dozen or so off the top of my head. Admittedly they are rare, but really not more rare than the console equivalent.
All fighting games
All lego games
Lots of indie games (Jamestown, Castle Crashers, etc)
Sonic Racing Transformed
Etc.
Love my gaming PC I just built.
Unfortunately, my friends and family are not technical enough be into PC gaming.
So console multiplayer is by far the biggest pull for me.
Jumping on with my friends and family for CoD, BF, Madden, ect, is my main thing.
I would love to get more of them into PC, but they can't/wont justify the cost, and are by default 'couch gamers'.
Honestly not sure why PC should be the 'go to' choice for gamers, it has even stricter DRM on all the popular games, and no universal voice chat application(bububu Team Speak!...yeah, only if the person has downloaded it, installed it, and signed into that same server for chat...that is NOT universal, ala auto loaded with no work from the user).
PC is great for graphic whores, or for MMO type games, the controls are superior for most games as well.
Unfortunately it's just not as streamlined when it comes to the social aspects, or the living room integration.
Which is sad, would be a blast to play some TF2 with the OR with my real life friends and family.
Unfortunately, my friends and family are not technical enough be into PC gaming.
So console multiplayer is by far the biggest pull for me.
Jumping on with my friends and family for CoD, BF, Madden, ect, is my main thing.
I would love to get more of them into PC, but they can't/wont justify the cost, and are by default 'couch gamers'.
Honestly not sure why PC should be the 'go to' choice for gamers, it has even stricter DRM on all the popular games, and no universal voice chat application(bububu Team Speak!...yeah, only if the person has downloaded it, installed it, and signed into that same server for chat...that is NOT universal, ala auto loaded with no work from the user).
PC is great for graphic whores, or for MMO type games, the controls are superior for most games as well.
Unfortunately it's just not as streamlined when it comes to the social aspects, or the living room integration.
Which is sad, would be a blast to play some TF2 with the OR with my real life friends and family.
You're being generous. These things were "obstacles" in 2000.
~$1500
Edit: I guess most of this was answered yesterday
Realize that high (and medium) look almost identical to very high/ultra. Graphics are 90% about the art direction nowadays and those extra effects they squeeze in at the highest settings don't make much of a difference. Seriously:
Then we have the really awesome differences. You like AA, but very few console developers do so you will be forced to use bad or no AA in many games. If you want 60fps and low input lag then laugh that goodbye when all the 30fps games are made because "only fast racers" need 60fps. And loading times are super awesome with SSDs. In Planetside 2 switching maps took 9 seconds and as you may know maps in PS2 are bigger than some countries
And if you want to play on the highest settings don't get a console. The PS4 will have a much weaker GPU than mine (20FPS in Crysis 3 on very high, sub 10 if I click on 8xMSAA) and a CPU where four cores are nearly as powerful as one of my four cores in stock form.
Realize that high (and medium) look almost identical to very high/ultra. Graphics are 90% about the art direction nowadays and those extra effects they squeeze in at the highest settings don't make much of a difference. Seriously:
Then we have the really awesome differences. You like AA, but very few console developers do so you will be forced to use bad or no AA in many games. If you want 60fps and low input lag then laugh that goodbye when all the 30fps games are made because "only fast racers" need 60fps. And loading times are super awesome with SSDs. In Planetside 2 switching maps took 9 seconds and as you may know maps in PS2 are bigger than some countries
Sunrise...
And if you want to play on the highest settings don't get a console. The PS4 will have a much weaker GPU than mine (20FPS in Crysis 3 on very high, sub 10 if I click on 8xMSAA
) and a CPU where four cores are nearly as powerful as one of my four cores in stock form.1. I have used MANY controllers in my time, of course I adapt, still don't like M&KB. People are allowed to have preferences, as you can attest to.
2. Sorry but this is absurd. Your experience does not equal everyone else's. Just because YOU like sitting in front of your monitor does not mean most other people do, as evidenced by ratio of computer gamers vs. computers in the wild. Headphones are ok if you don't mind wearing headphones.
"The best experience" is relative as evidenced by my examples above. Computer gaming will never be for me and the majority of people until it can grow out of its user UNFRIENDLYness. Until that is relegated to a mostly non-issue, it will remain as it is today.