Poll: According to my peers, PC gaming is inferior to consoles.

[adamtm]

Chances are that if you have a console (which is a substantial investment in itself) AND a PC (which everyone has anyways because you -need- one in this day and age) you can afford an upgrade to make your PC "up to spec" if you care about gaming.
The specifications for games are now sufficiently low enough in disparity to the released PC hardware, that the majority can run them on a 300$ Wallmart box. Most "gaming PCs" north of 800$ are hopelessly overpowered to run recent games. I own one for the aforementioned sum with a 9800GTX and can run Witcher 2 on Medium just fine (which still looks amazing).

My argument is that the marketing baffles me, obviously the market for PC games is huge because the hardware already exists in most of the households.

Well, yes. The logical choice would be to think that since most PCs are more powerful that current consoles (or they require an upgrade that anyone can do) and more numerous, they have to be the most popular platform, but, most people don't use their PCs to play video games. It comes to how the majority chooses to play rather than the potential that computers have to run them.

The majority plays Farmville on Facebook, on their PC.

EDIT to expand my answer: I see the future market requiring no particular hardware, with the rise of WebGL or UNITY that can run in a browser with a plugin. These engines already deliver some very impressive graphics for browser games and can be played full-screen (Drakensang Online: http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/4445736/img/ttt/gggr.jpg )
This seems like the logical step forward for AAA. Its always-on DRM because you need a connection, the dev has constant control over the content and patching, the user can play with plug and play from any device capable of handling the game, there is no distribution, no licensing fees for the platform, no boxes to be shipped, no hardware-platform to be taken into account or ported.

 

[adamtm]

Chances are that if you have a console (which is a substantial investment in itself) AND a PC (which everyone has anyways because you -need- one in this day and age) you can afford an upgrade to make your PC "up to spec" if you care about gaming.
The specifications for games are now sufficiently low enough in disparity to the released PC hardware, that the majority can run them on a 300$ Wallmart box. Most "gaming PCs" north of 800$ are hopelessly overpowered to run recent games. I own one for the aforementioned sum with a 9800GTX and can run Witcher 2 on Medium just fine (which still looks amazing).

My argument is that the marketing baffles me, obviously the market for PC games is huge because the hardware already exists in most of the households.

Well, yes. The logical choice would be to think that since most PCs are more powerful that current consoles (or they require an upgrade that anyone can do) and more numerous, they have to be the most popular platform, but, most people don't use their PCs to play video games. It comes to how the majority chooses to play rather than the potential that computers have to run them.

The majority plays Farmville on Facebook.

Cheap and accessible always wins.

See my edit in the previous post on what i mean.

 

[Uncompetative]

I don't even know what's going on, your poll, the quote and your original post all seem to tackle 3 completely different things.

I agree. None of this makes any sense to me.

All I can advise is that you spend less time on Facebook.

 

[Outright Villainy]

Oh hey guys I noticed a fire over here and...

Oh, right, it's this shit again. Carry on.

 

[EbonBehelit]

Ah, the age-old debate continues...

As far as I'm concerned - purely from a gaming perspective - a PC is basically a more powerful console with the versatility to match. However, a PC has harsher upkeep than a console and has more far more room for problems occurring.

A console is basically a stable platform based on slightly obsolete hardware dedicated for the purpose, and designed as such to minimize required knowledge to keep running. The costs of a console are pretty much ALWAYS lower than a decent gaming PC, and this enables a lower bar of entry for casual users, as well as less headaches along the way.

Neither is superior, as they both work for their intended purpose. The only place this diverts is with the inherent superiority of KB+Mouse over a gamepad for certain game types (FPS & RTS), and vice-versa (Fighters, platformers).

 

[Assassin Xaero]

Hardware completely rapes all the consoles combined. As for games, PC gamers seem to get the short end of the stick a lot because developers just port things over now.

Most of console gamers are tired with PC gamers expecting everybody to pay $2000 for things to look shiny.

Mine wasn't even that much, and I maxed the thing out since I'm a software developer and use it for a server, along with gaming. You can even get an Alienware for less than $1,000.

Why would you BUY a gaming PC?

I didn't, I built it. Not all at once either. And what is wrong with that (guess I'm not getting the question)?

Buying an Alienware or an Ibuypower pc is a horrible value.

Actually, I did buy an Alienware laptop, and it was cheaper than other computers (ASUS mostly) that I was looking at, which is why I bought it.

 

[Bad Jim]

PC is inferior? Hell no. Put a recent cross platform title side by side on the different platforms. The PC version will be clearly better.

Generally a recently released console will beat all but the most tricked out PCs. But the current generation is half a decade old and loses to all but the cheapest PCs.

A new console generation is overdue, which would make consoles better. But until then . . .

 

[2ndblackjedi]

I voted potatoes cause you can't boil, mash or stick a PC in a stew.

 

[adamtm]

The majority plays Farmville on Facebook, on their PC.

EDIT to expand my answer: I see the future market requiring no particular hardware, with the rise of WebGL or UNITY that can run in a browser with a plugin. These engines already deliver some very impressive graphics for browser games and can be played full-screen (Drakensang Online: http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/4445736/img/ttt/gggr.jpg )
This seems like the logical step forward for AAA. Its always-on DRM because you need a connection, the dev has constant control over the content and patching, the user can play with plug and play from any device capable of handling the game, there is no distribution, no licensing fees for the platform, no boxes to be shipped, no hardware-platform to be taken into account or ported.

It's the next logical step, forget about platforms altogether and just send the content to the player no matter what he is using to play, TV, PC, cellphone, whatever. Problem is, everyone wants to be the one charging for the service. That's why Sony bought Ericsson and Microsoft is trying to push Metro for all that it's worth. Before we had enough power in our pockets to run AAA video games it was all about who had the larger piece of the pie, now it's like an open buffet and everybody wants to be the fat man.

If can be more specific about it, I find the whole idea of cloud gaming or video-streaming for games (OnLive) is the wrong direction. I find cloud-services to be the wrong path in every single sense and essentially impractical solutions to a non-existing problem.

 

[Sewer Rat]

Yeah, sorry, but saying that a game 'looks like a pc game' is not an insult. A good gaming PC is actually capable of making games much prettier then those on current consoles. Hell, my laptop which was not built specifically for gaming is able to run games at the same quality as a PS3. This isn't to say that console gaming is bad, but the hardware in a good pc beats everything in this generation of consoles. Of course though, the issue with PC gaming is that it's inconsistent. With a console, you know you will be able to run every game at pretty much the same level of quality with minimal FPS drops, this is not tru for PC gaming where you do have to do your research to see if you can even play the game. It really is an inane argument though, go with what you like. I will say this though, from my experience the online community in PC games is MUCH more mature and friendly then consoles.

 

[Worgen]

I have the joy of having both consule and PC.

I find that consule for me, works better for FPS. PC works better for strategy and MMORPG.

Yeah, those precise controls and speed of the gamepad... oh wait.

The only thing consoles are better for are racing games and fighting games, and the pc can be better for racing games if it has a wheel.

I can also say that games like Assassin's Creed also play a BIT better on gamepad.

Not consoles. We can use all kinds of controls. They have gamepad, and "motion control", heuheuhuehue.

PC gamers expecting everybody to pay $2000 for things to look shiny.

Yeah except that most PC gamers will call you an idiot if you pay that much for a PC, but hey, don't let reality get in your way.

I can probably buy two godlike PCs for $1000 each, or three incredibly good PCs for $2000 total. And by buy I mean build myself.

Actually I have to take my point back, no game plays better on the console now that control pads tend to work with the pc, thanks usb connectors. I guess the only point consoles have over the pc is that publishers haven't yet made drm horrible on them, but you can rest assured they are working on it and chances are the next generation of consoles will be pretty damn user unfriendly in the used game department.

 

[masticina]

Well I was a PC gamer now I am a console gamer.

How did this happen? Well you get older and other things become important to. Then having to deal with drivers or settings just gets in the way. Yes I have sacrificed some Image Quality by going to Console side. But I actually can always trust the game runs.

Things I "miss" [not really]
- Mods
- Certain Games

But beyond that I like my consoles and I like the simplicity of a console, a controller and a television right to go.

I also moved from PC's to Laptops and put Ubuntu on it. Why? Because it is a work system not a gaming system. I just want things to work and that means choosing the most stable basis. And that is not windows...

In short I try to expend less energy and money. Yes PC games are cheaper then their console variants and have mods and better image quality. But to get that done you need to deal with Windows and Drivers and Settings. And worse keep an eye on the technology websites to know what new graphic and sound hardware is around.

Not to mention PC-game DRM. Yes I know Console Games have one big piece of DRM.. they are played on the console! But they do work! Unlike PC DRM which is evidently more in the way!

Really on my laptop I want to know what is going on and I am not going to give control to some Game DRM thing. No!

I get why some gamers play on the PC. More power to you!

 

[shasjas]

im a PS3 gamer and i think that PC gaming is superior if, and this is the crucial bit, you have the money to spend on a good PC.
and the reason for this is mods. and thats pretty much it. potentially nicer graphics are a bonus, but mods are the main reason.

 

[adamtm]

But beyond that I like my consoles and I like the simplicity of a console, a controller and a television right to go.

I also moved from PC's to Laptops and put Ubuntu on it.[....] And that is not windows...

[...]But to get that done you need to deal with Windows and Drivers and Settings.

Sorry, does not compute. You are putting up with Linux as your OS but complain about driver issues for games...

Its like saying "I enjoy the simplicity of my Toyota, thats why I built my own hotrod from scratch"

 

[Atheist.]

If you condense that poll to yes, no, maybe, and not the same, you'll see it's about 6.1% no, 5.4% yes, maybe 7.7%/ Not related 26.8%. That's easier to read.

 

[Elivercury]

Why does everyone seem to quote that PC gaming sucks because they don't like playing with a keyboard/mouse?

It's not like the PC can't accept both xbox and ps3 controllers, and vice versa, I was using a mouse for Red Alert back on the PS1, so there is no reason that the Xbox can't use a mouse+keyboard if desired (in fact you do for games like FFXI).

I mean, fundamentally surely this is a very simple argument? PC's are generally more powerful, therefore they're better. Now of course, because they are better they also cost more money.

At the end of the day though, the games are what you play, and is the bottom line for every platform v.s. platform argument. You use the platform that has the games you want to play. There is no point owning a platform that has games you're not interested in, even if it can show it with prettier textures.

 

[Fearzone]

The poll says it all, except it isn't really apples and oranges, since pcs are mostly running console ports nowadays. When they aren't, pc gaming is clearly better. PC games have deeper richer gameplay than console-only or cross platform titles. Even when they are running console ports, you get better resolutions, better frame rates, better antialiasing, and a better online community. There is a gaming master race and they use PCs.

Now, what would be apples and oranges is PCs and portable titles. Portables have surprisingly good gameplay, deeper than the nonstop shooters and platformers you get with consoles. Still not quite as good as the PC, but after the PC, they'd be my second choice. Except for Housemarque titles, my PS3 is mainly a Blu-Ray palyer and video streamer, but at least does an admirable job of that.

 

[Macrobstar]

The poll says it all, except it isn't really apples and oranges, since pcs are mostly running console ports nowadays. When they aren't, pc gaming is clearly better. PC games have deeper richer gameplay than console-only or cross platform titles. Even when they are running console ports, you get better resolutions, better frame rates, better antialiasing, and a better online community. There is a gaming master race and they use PCs.

Now, what would be apples and oranges is PCs and portable titles. Portables have surprisingly good gameplay, deeper than the nonstop shooters and platformers you get with consoles. Still not quite as good as the PC, but after the PC, they'd be my second choice. Except for Housemarque titles, my PS3 is mainly a Blu-Ray palyer and video streamer, but at least does an admirable job of that.

Because forget personal preference right?Sorry if I don't have the time to fuck around with drivers and shit, but thats because I have other hobbies

 

[masticina]

But beyond that I like my consoles and I like the simplicity of a console, a controller and a television right to go.

I also moved from PC's to Laptops and put Ubuntu on it.[....] And that is not windows...

[...]But to get that done you need to deal with Windows and Drivers and Settings.

Sorry, does not compute. You are putting up with Linux as your OS but complain about driver issues for games...

Its like saying "I enjoy the simplicity of my Toyota, thats why I built my own hotrod from scratch"

Ah read again slower

Seriously once I moved to consoles and have to reinstall windows... again.. for the second time in 6 months I was done with it. I wanted something I could trust to run. And don't get to me with "well if you kept windows clean" ... it was Windows Vista! Yeah one of those "Hidey Hole" systems that loves to HIDE things. If there was a problem I just didn't want to do the bug hunt anymore.

Linux worked.

Do I miss a few games you know not really in the end sure some really lovely games like Vampire the Masquarade: Bloodlines but I can get over that!

 

[Violator[xL]]

As long as no console offers games for REAL strategists like Total War, Europa Universalis or similar titles, why on earth would it be superior? Because you can play 'button smash revolution & dance like a highschool moron' on those?