jamesworkshop said:
Russ Pitts said:
jamesworkshop said:
Russ Pitts said:
FROGGEman2 said:
Just a question...
Do you and Susan switch jobs every issue?
All of the editors rtake turns writing the Editor's Note.
jamesworkshop said:
Russ Pitts said:
jamesworkshop said:
I don't agree Pc hardware is stupidly cheap nowadays and even the consoles have had a decent price drop with no next gen for about 5 years
"Cheap" is relative.
Yes but I can't think of any point in time where £80 graphics cards could play the latest games with maximum settings or DDR2 ram being £10 a Gig or where 1TB hardrives can be picked up for under £60.
look back to 2006 and that kind of money wouldn't buy you anywhere near that level of hardware.
Plus there are far more free to play games nowadays even Quakelive and Battlefield heros don't require a 3D card and thus happily played on an old computer.
Thus, my point that "cheap" is relative. I grant you that PC gaming is currently less expensive than it ever has been, but it is still a pricier option than console gaming.
My point wasn't that PC was cheaper than console gaming but tht it was less expensive than it used to be with PCs being cheaper than they have ever been in the past (console ports can't challenge the hardware ATM) plus the greater numbers of free to play models and flash based browser games (or popcap games) .
Also the major 3 consoles are going throught price drops and thus gaming isn't that expensive on the whole in the current economy.
Again I have to point our your bias, because gaming - a hobby with a buy-in of at least $299US + (the price of one game), and a subsistence cost of $60US for every new game - can only be considered "cheap" by someone who's been conditioned to not worry about paying for things like food, heat and shelter. While I agree with you that gaming is, perhaps, cheaper now than it has ever been, that does not make it an inexpensive hobby, compared to, say, birdwatching, or walking outside in the sunshine.
Runescape = free
Mapplestory = free
Quake live = Free
Battlefield heroes = free
All those games on newgrounds = free
Evony = free
The massive quantity of Facebook games = free (I believe the escapist covered this new Phenomena)
All those cheap arcade games on the console networks
The point is that gaming is not working against the economy but is moving in accordance with it and thus not in any real danger sure times are hard but we can clearly see the gaming industry addapting to the economic enviroment and not just sticking thier fingers in their ears and raising prices (unless you're Bobby Kotick)
Spending $60 a game isn't a requirment of videogaming, much like driving doesn't require a Ferrari F50
Everything has a price thats just how the world works and gaming on a budget has never been as good as it is today.
I mean look at the PS2 and its continuing unit sales success over its bigger and more expensive PS3 now for a complete videogame virgin (with little disposable income) it offers a nice price point (ebay can be your friend)
http://popular.ebay.co.uk/ns/Video-Games/Playstation-2-Console.html
And every game by now is going to be stuck in the bargin bin and with over 900 titles to choose from gaming on the PS2 would be comparable in price to buying a DVD player and a sizeable movie collection and offer far more hours of entertainment.
Pointing to the absolute low-end minimum expenditure of maintaining the hobby as evidence that it's not, in fact, an expensive hobby is not a convincing argument. Obviously a budget-minded gamer could subsist at the level you indicate, but in reality most gamers buy some high-end products and some low-end products, and as a result ride the middle of the bell curve in terms of cost. Which I argue still places gaming in the high end of hobbies, by cost.
I could spin an analogous argument to yours by saying "walking outdoors" is a more expensive hobby than gaming because hardcore walking shoes cost $X, wicking, rip-proof fabric trousers cost $Y, a portable GPS unit costs $Z and maps for your local area will cost 4Q. But anyone who spends time outdoors knows that this argument is a fallacy, because in actuality you can spend far less and still have an enjoyable experience.
You're attempting to prove that gaming is an inexpensive hobby by pointing out that there are free and bargain products one can buy to maintain their hobby, which is true, but anyone who games knows that most gamers don't live out of the free and bargain bin section alone, just as anyone who hikes knows that most hikers don't buy all their gear from premium outfitters.
Again, I maintain that, in spite of various ways in which gaming can be made
less expensive through thriftiness or by taking advantage of the state of the economy, it is still, by far, one of the more expensive consumer hobbies one can undertake.
