PC Gaming, too expensive!!

[BigMac]

People like to plug the thing in and have it just work.

Look, I'm reasonably knowledgeable about computers and even I like to just install a game and have it just work. It's just that when you want to get the extra mile on performance or image quality you will have to invest time in it and that's ok as long as the plug and play experience is acceptable in terms of quality and performance. Maybe they should just make the "automatic configuration" button the default choice, and only show graphics options when people want to see them. Most do that already with advanced options but I'm also talking about screen resolution, etc. How hard can it be to detect the native resolution of an LCD screen?

 

[Topcover]

I haven't had my pc red ring of death lately. I can fix a blue screen of death but man those red rings hurt a lot.

 

[llama_man]

but man those red rings hurt a lot.

Been hanging around Wingding? [/if you don't know, don't ask]

 

[MarkG]

I think Mark Rein at Epic hit the nail on the head when it comes to the decline in PC gaming. There is a HUGE divide between the low end systems and high end ones.

While I agree that integrated graphics are generally crap, I honestly can't take his complaints seriously. If I remember correctly, he was complaining because UT3 didn't sell well on PCs; UT3 is basically a 1999 game with a consolized interface and high-end graphics, which isn't so bad since it was one of the most addictive games of that era (I played UT fairly regularly for years after it came out), but isn't exactly a 'must buy' for the PC market today.

Worse than that, when I installed it after getting it as part of a multi-game deal on Steam, it told me my PC was 'below the minimum requirements for the game'. Now, it's only a P4-3GHz with a 7800GS card, but it's a heck of a lot faster graphically than the typical low-end PC that the average home PC buyer might get today; if my system doesn't even meet the minimum requirements, let alone the recommended requirements, then he can hardly complain that people aren't buying his game. He should develop games for the systems that exist, not develop them for the fastest PCs around and then complain that he can't sell to people who bought slow ones.

The really stupid thing is that it actually plays with a pretty high frame-rate on my 'below minimum requirements' system at 1024x768 with the detail sliders set to mid-range...

 

[tsd16]

I have long debated this issue with my friends as I am a hardcore PC gamer, and have been for the last 10 years. I recently bought my son a 360 so I have been struggling over whether to upgrade my aging PC. (Dell XPS gen 3)

I think the OP hits some major nerves. For one, I too have grown weary with the constant upgrading. At first it was like a hobby and I enjoyed it, but with increasing cost it has grown tedious, not fun. I also grow weary with every new game coming out needing to be "tweaked" to run well. I had to do this even when my PC was current. You still need to tweak this and that to squeeze out max FPS. Just read the article on Crysis - it is the same with every game. Sometimes ATI drivers are disadvantaged, other times it is Nvidia. Sometimes it's the sound card. With the 360, I know if I buy it and stick it in the drive it will work well and play well. (assuming the 360 works, LOL, with the ROD, etc.)

But, the controllers suck compared to a mouse. I really like the 360 controller's design, but you still lack the precision of a mouse.

The reality is every major game developer's primary development thrust is consoles first, then the PC gets the port. I have read up extensively on this topic and that's the truth - because that is where the money is. Read this: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=15861

COD 4 will outsell Halo because it was released across all console platforms in addition to the PC, and the PC will barely show a dent compared to any platform sales.

With the exception of Crysis, there is no AAA game coming out that will not be released on a console. At E3, every game was being shown on a console, not a PC. The reality is if you don't already have a gaming rig and want to start gaming, you are better off with a console, unless you want to play MMORPG's. Multiplayer on the 360 is also very weak compared to PC's. For example, COD 4 supports 32 players on the PC versus a measley 18 on the 360.

So, really, it is a tough question which way to go - but I am unlikely to upgrade and get a new rig like I have every three years in the past. I just don't see a future in PC gaming anymore. And believe me, if you knew me, for me to say that is a major act of heresy.

Wouldnt this, in the long term be kind of good for PC sales in terms of upgrading? If they keep just porting everything over from consoles, I suppose the graphics really wont be getting any better, therefore no need to upgrade the PC. I think thats the primary concept, haters of PC gaming don't get, you don't HAVE to upgrade, just tweak the graphics to the same level. They seem to ignore this fact, Console graphics = dont get any better over their lifespan PC=graphics keep increasing all the time. But you arent required to utilize these graphics, you could run your PC like a console and maintain current gen graphics throughout its life. My p4 system (2004)6800GT(2005) lasted me until i decided to build a new PC in january (750 bucks, not exactly breaking the bank here). I was never at any point frustrated with my ability to play games over this 4 year time period, graphics still looked better than ps2 or xbox. If you talk to people who feel the need to shell out 5-600 dollars every 6 months on their PC, of course you would get that type of idea that pc gaming is expenisive. Fact is ITS NOT necessary.

The funny thing is I am sure alot of the people complaining about PC gaming being expensive are the same ones who have 10-20k worth of home theatre equipment, and probably spend thousands more upgrading that every year, because super THX dolby digital super man sound 20.0 was released.

Thats the thing, nowadays if you want to enjoy the graphics of the nex gen system, you need an HD tv and theres your evening out. Although I am willing to bet the primary party involved in hating pc gaming are people in the 10-18 age group, because mom and dad already have the HDTV and they got the xbox, ps3, or wii for christmas.

 

[omenowl]

Considering HDTV also hook up to your graphics card you figure the PC market should be using 1920x1080 as a standard.

It isn't that PCs are always expensive, but rather they always have to be tweaked. I always have to download a patch or download a driver to make sure it works. If I have problems with frame rate or crashes I have to look it up. Also levels may have very different frame rates. The pc games do not automatically shift to a lower graphics intensive mode if the game FPS suddenly slows down. Maybe if PC games would auto adjust settings dependent on frame rate people would be much happier.

The advantage of a console for the most part is I get a complete game with fewer bugs and it runs smoothly on my hardware. The OS is optimized for graphics and this allows me to focus on the game rather than my system.

 

[LkS]

I actually think it's less expensive now to put together a gaming PC than it has been in the past. Due to competition CPU and GPU prices have fallen incredibly recently. The amount of bang you can get for your buck in the last few months is staggering compared to less than two years ago.

I think people are seeing consoles as an alternative to PC gaming at the moment while they are capable of doing similar graphics at a lower price but in the next few years I predict people will come back to the PC as it moves ahead of the consoles with progress in visuals. The graphics in PS3 and Xbox are equivalent to 7800/x1900 or something which I already consider old compared to what DX10 cards can do.

In the next few years no one is going to be getting really excited about graphics in console games. Anyone interested in the technological advancement of games is going to be looking to the PC. Look back to the first half of this decade when DX9 cards and pixel shaders were coming in. I remember a lot more excitement in the gaming community surrounding games like Doom 3, Far Cry, Half Life 2, FEAR than any PS2 game (Grand Theft Auto aside).

 

[envymert]

To the OP. I play on PC because I like the best of the best ..... Your 8800gts are not obsolete they are just older tech. This doesnt mean they cannot do their job well. Your argument is like saying why spend money on a car when it will have a new model year in 12 months and other models.

I play pc and pay for the most up to date tech, I showed a few die hard PS3 fans the BF3 video and they were like holy crap I need to get that on PC. People know that for the tech PC is and always will be best. It does have a price tag but like others have previously stated comparing a computer to a console is like comparing apples to oranges. And the price is NOT that bad for getting into a good affordable gaming rig. I just built my cousin a computer with 20 inch widescreen monitor for $720. And it can play games at way better resolutions that a ps3.

A athlon multi core cpu 4gigs of ram, 1tb hd and a 460 fermi for around $500 then monitor and speakers is great value and ultimately more versatile than any console.


Do me a favor, play some games like bf2 on a good comp running on 1920x1080 with details set on medium or higher and then try playing on a console. I did and thats why I sold my PS3 .......

 

[BeCoolBro]

Resurrecting ancient threads is stupid.Why not start your own?

 

[MadCatz900]

My 8800GTS lasted me about 3 years so i wouldnt say they are useless within a year or whatever. People forget a couple of things when they compare pc gaming to console gaming and that is

1. They say pc gamers need to upgrade their hardware every few months or every year which is untrue because you can lower graphics settings down and get a good framerate to play games on a 1 year+ old card (My 8800GTS plays some of todays latest games at medium settings without struggle). You might say well the graphics are one of the reasons why pc gaming is better (which is true) but at medium settings games will still look a lot better than the console version.

2. Console gamers over exaggerate when they say pc gaming costs 3-5x more than console gaming which again is not true because you have to think about the games you will be buying over the 5+ year period you will have your console. The reason why people believe pc gaming costs more is because they look at the most expensive hardware and compare consoles to that when you can get a mid range cpu and gpu and games will look and play better on the pc.

If you buy 10 games in your first year on console (many people buy more than that) they are usually £35-40 but on pc they are £25-30 so your saving money on each game you buy (it adds up to a lot if you buy many games). Also you have to pay for xbox live if you own that console and plan to play online which is more money you dont spend when pc gaming (dont compare MMOs to xbox live because you have to pay for xbox live to play all games online)

Also dont forget when you had to by thins like the wifi adapter/batteries for pad/hard drive, and whatever else the xbox needed.

NOTE: Im not saying a pc is cheaper than a console (it all depends on how many games you buy) but its certainly not as expensive as people make believe.

There are a lot more benefits to pc gaming like:

Graphics
Community/Modding
Dedicated servers
Controls (Yes you can plug a pad in your pc)
Games are cheaper
etc etc

PC gaming will always be superior for many reasons including the ones listed above.

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey