The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race

[Lightknight]

I have to admit that I only built my pc to play certain games on my pc that weren't as enjoyable on my console (I accidentally bought Skyrim for the ps3 and it didn't work until after 5 months of patches, during which time I was able to patiently wait for good pc component deals and then put them together to make my master pc what it is today).

Now that I have it and a strong steam library, I am honestly beginning to see my consoles as media, exclusive titles and party gaming machines more than my primary dedicated gaming machines. That was completely unnanticipated but now I have greater control over my environment and can even begin to encorporate third party modding that can be really extensive for some titles. Not only that but if I want to browse the internet, it's only a click away and not completely enfuriating with a search utility that has no place in this world.

I will say that I haven't had any issues with Steam games on my computer. But I'm also on the high-tech side of the computer industry in which I call into very large companies across the US and resolve significant networking issues. So when I had a driver issues with Skyrim after updating my monitor I knew that rolling back the change I'd made would resolve that. My mother, however, would likely have had to give me a call about the problem and whether or not she was right to fix it with a hammer, magnets, and water.

 

[neppakyo]

Can't believe there are still stupid people out there.. wait a sec, yes I can. A good PC gaming rig like most people have said only costs around $700, and will pretty much play games over 30FPS on high settings.

I usually upgrade a part on my pc every 1-3 years, and depending on architecture changes.

Asus M4A785TD-EVO Motherboard from 2009
Phenom II x4 965 Black Edition from 2009
2 TB Western digital black edition HDD from 2011
DVD RW drive from 2008
Geforce GT 660 from a few months ago
16GB ram from a few months ago (upgraded from 6GB from 2009)
Logitech G15 gaming keyboard from 2005
Rzer Taipan mouse from a few months ago
Asus 24" Monitor from a few months ago (now primary)
LG 20" Monitor from 2009 (now secondary)
Logitech 5.1 surround sound speakers from 2011

See, I have a decent rig for gaming, plays everything, just upgrade a few things along the years to keep the system above average and cheap.

I am a proud member of the Glorious PC master race.

Captcha: Rowboat, which MS doesn't have enough of when the xbone titanic hits the iceberg.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Yeah all junk I have to pay extra for. No thank you.

Did you not understand the point the person to whom you're responding is making, and that which the link he posts demonstrates, is that PC gaming is cheaper than console gaming especially figuring in savings from lowered PC game prices and constant sales?

Also what if I don't want to play RTS or MMOs or Western RPGs or other genres that are normally associated w/ PC gaming? I don't care for Skyrim, it bored me on consoles, it'll bore me on PC. As of right now, the only two things on PC that interest me are Poker Night at the Inventory and TF2.

Then what, pray tell, is your idea of a good game that isn't as you put it, "popcorn entertainment"?

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Still going strong on a GTX 465 and a Core 2 Quad. Maybe this generation will get me to upgrade at least the video card if not build a new pc. I see no point in getting a console this gen unless the exclusives have have the words "Pikmin" or "Metroid" in the title and they are well received by most reviews. On top of that, I'd have to buy a box that implies Nintendo wishes to urinate on me, so I am still skeptical about that.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

But not less than $400. Sorry not buying into it. I may not be poor but I certainly have interests outside of gaming and I'm not going to senselessly blow my money. I'm not going to constantly upgrade my PC with parts just to get something running properly.

My current laptop cost $400 last December, and plays anything that came out in the last six months just fine, especially when you consider "low" graphical settings are still consistently of higher quality than you'll get on consoles.

 

[nodlimax]

The thing with being able to play almost every game in PC history even though your system is just 1 month old is one of the huge advantages the PC has over the consoles. And after having the current console generation for so long console gamers will now really feel to the problem of missing the backwards compatibility.

In addition we can currently see how the console systems get locked down even more to only run certain components. We'll see if you will be able to get something like the Occulus Rift to run on a PS4/Xbone or if you have use a MS or Sony specific alternative which most likely will be far inferior to the Rift.

Anyway, I never felt like being part of the "master race". I was able to see the "start and play" advantage of the consoles. But they're losing this stuff rapidly as they try to be these "all in one" systems (=> basically a PC in your living room....). At the same time everyone that doesn't wear fanboy glasses should have been able to see that PC always has a performance advantage over consoles if build properly. You cannot push the best hardware into a 500-600$ system. In 99% of the cases it will be inferior performance wise to the 2000$ PC. It's simple logic.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

why can't backwards compatability be emulated?
this gen is 7+ years old, the new gen must easily be able to emulate them.
cost? charge people to download the emulator on PSN/XBL

 

[DTWolfwood]

I am far too tickled by this picture not to give you props for it! XD

I'm just glad i stuck to PC gaming. That and the fact i like RTS and they don't exist on the consoles lol

 

[Entitled]

Maybe all of gaming is elitist, especially in a world where one-third of the population doesn't even have electricity, let alone an internet connection. But if I'm going to enable someone's elitism, it's going to be the guy who's elitist because he's smarter. Not the one who's elitist because of fucking bullshit.

That's a nice conclusion.

There are some elitists who arbitrarily describe themselves as the "elite", based on random priviledge that they got. Money, taste, skill, etc. Even literal racists considering themselves a literal Master Race, are elitists that way.

Then there are the "elitists" whose message seems to be more inclusive, as a "be smart" challenge for their surroundings. "Look how much I have learned! Follow me if you can!"

PC gamers can often sound like the former, when talking about expensive rigs, and complicated control mechanics, but really, I think at the core of their arguments, most of them are really just standing up for people being more knowledgeable and free, and in control of their own games, instead of eating up whatever "The Man" offers.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Anyway, I never felt like being part of the "master race". I was able to see the "start and play" advantage of the consoles. But they're losing this stuff rapidly as they try to be these "all in one" systems (=> basically a PC in your living room....)...It's simple logic.

That's what made me switch entirely to PC after a lifetime of playing on both consoles and PC. Consoles adapted the worst aspects of PC gaming, while the drawbacks of PC gaming have gone almost entirely by the wayside.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

For $535 you can get a computer that can run almost every single game at above 40 fps on ULTRA settings at 1080p (yeah, your consoles don't run at 1080p). Also keep in mind that gaming computers aren't magical machines that can only be used for playing video games like consoles. Also, video game prices for pc are on sale ALL the time. Skyrim was on sale for 30 dollars about a month and a half after it was released. Actually GOOD games come out for 15 dollars all the time. Mods, dedicated servers, gaming community servers, free to play games, mmos, real time strategy, etc ,etc. Also no paying to play online. Choice between using a keyboard/mouse or gamepad. Upgradeability. Games that have communities for decades. (CoD 2, Bf 1942, CS 1.6, etc).

If you are serious about getting the best deal for a gaming system, PC is the only option. Everything else is secondary.

Yeah all junk I have to pay extra for. No thank you. Also what if I don't want to play RTS or MMOs or Western RPGs or other genres that are normally associated w/ PC gaming? I don't care for Skyrim, it bored me on consoles, it'll bore me on PC. As of right now, the only two things on PC that interest me are Poker Night at the Inventory and TF2.

Sorry, you're not convincing me that PC gaming is a good thing to jump onto, you're only convincing me that it's good for popcorn entertainment. I can get that via my 3DS already.

Also your PC jargon of 1080p and stuff like that doesn't mean a thing to me.

you can now spend less than $700 and get a very passable gaming computer.

But not less than $400. Sorry not buying into it. I may not be poor but I certainly have interests outside of gaming and I'm not going to senselessly blow my money. I'm not going to constantly upgrade my PC with parts just to get something running properly.

Also your PC jargon of 1080p and stuff like that doesn't mean a thing to me.

Wat? That's not PC jargon. PC Jargon would be referring to it as 1920X1080. 1080P is the highest resolution HDTV standard, the one that Blu-Rays output at and most modern TVs have as a native resolution.

As for the price, you can pretty much knock off $250 of any stated PC price, because that's what you need to spend just to get a basic word processing, internet, and e-mail machine -- which you might not have noticed is pretty much a necessity for living and working in the modern world. What's more, you save a crapload of money in the longrun going with PC, thanks to things like steam sales and indie bundles. Not to mention, if you're comparing it to the Xbox, you don't need to pay a monthly fee to Microsoft to access the stuff you're already paying for from the game publisher and your ISP. You have to do that on the Xbox, unless you want crippled online functionality.

Finally, pray tell, what genres of games do you actually like that you can get on consoles but not the PC? I think you'll be surprised at what's available.

 

[Nicolairigel]

Give in, Yatzhee, give in!

Going from using a PS3 to a simple gaming laptop was one of the best decision I had ever made. Then when I upgraded to a fancy-shmancy Desktop from Ibuypower, forget about it. Gaming became like 50% more enjoyable with mods and steam and such, and now I get to sit back and laugh at all of the bumbling in news on next-gen consoles instead of being worried about it.

In all seriousness, I believe consoles are necessary; not everyone can afford a 1100$ desktop like I can. I just feel like given the choice PC's (even the cheap ones) beat out consoles in every way.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Once you take the one of payments out of the equation; peripherals, storage, operating system or certain components (case, power supply) PC gaming isnt so expensive

Graphics card with 1GB GDDR5, motherboard, 8GB DDR3 RAM, 64 bit 3 core 3.2 GB CPU. all probably came to somewhere between £225 - to £250.
I can play every new game released to date on medium settings, can play most on high, and a few on ultra, all at 1080p
to change between those settings, go options> graphics settings pick your setting Click ok>click approve changes
not that difficult, I think anyone on Escapist can do that.

dont have to worry about generations. dont need to update it for a decade if i dont want, just keep lowering those settings. games are a hell of a lot cheaper. keep my back catalog.

Can't remember where i was goin with this... suppose I just dont see where elitist comes from? I'm cheap and lazy lol

 

[Anti-Robot Man]

Loved the article. Really, I thought it was fantastically well written and easily explained my personal problem with the upcoming generation of consoles.

One thing that I find rather humorous is that backwards compatibility is a very, VERY new notion with games. The N64 couldn't play SNES games, the Saturn couldn't play Genesis games, etc. There was a sweet spot in gaming history where newer systems could play older games (with a few exceptions), and it's looking as though that time is passing. It's rather sad.

You're cherry picking there though, the concept isn't "new" to gamers it's been around for 3 decades (longer than many gamers have been alive!): the Atari 7800 could play games for the 2600 (1980s), the Mega Drive/Genesis could play Master System titles (1980s again), most of the GameBoy line has had backwards compatibility (1990s-2000s). The Wii could play GC games and use it's peripherals, the PS2 was fully compatible with PS1 titles. The 360 was compatible (through emulation) with about half the Xbox library, and the first gen PS3s were backwards compatible. And of course PCs can play practically everything ever with a bit of work.

The only major breakpoints in the past were when a format change took place (sometimes not even then): i.e. different shaped cartridges or the move from cartridge to disc. The current gen doesn't have that excuse given that blu-ray drives are fully compatible with DVDs/CDs (not even a change there for Sony) and digitally downloaded games get round the format problem entirely.

I don't think backwards compatibility on the Xbox One would've been overly expensive to implement (especially compared to investments like the mandatory kinect and paying the NFL $400,000,000), even if done through hardware. I'm pretty sure all they would've needed to add was the processor from the 360, which has to be very cheap for MS by now. This would've benefited everyone, including Microsoft because people would've continued to buy downloadable titles from the current gen, especially in the first few years of the next console when titles will be thin on the ground and many developers continue to produce games for the massive consumer base of 360/PS3 owners (which likely also benefits the Wii U).

Lack of BC was a big strike against the Xbox One in my book, because I've accumulated a large library of digital titles (many of them games I've already owned on previous systems). I'm not going to keep rebuying titles every gen, I'd rather get them on pc and keep them for a decade or two. If MS wanted to sell everyone on an all digital future, they should've encouraged people to think that buying titles digitally would benefit them (they already have a complete record after all of all digital purchases on the 360), rather than being stuck on aging (unreliable) hardware.

 

[lacktheknack]

"A top-of-the-range desktop PC costs a lot more, but I wouldn't just be paying to buy into the new games club. I'd be paying for an entire history of games, safely filed away on GOG.com and the Steam listings."

No it's still not worth it Yahtzee. Not when it costs thousands of dollars for a man to accomplish. Shame on you and everyone who agrees with this. I'd like my games to be affordable without having to buy a bunch of random pieces that cost the price of an actual console.

Forget PC, it's the handheld market that's the true master race.

I can't tell if you just missed the point by all of the miles or not...

Just in case you ARE serious, I'll repeat this for the billionth time: Each computer component does not cost as much as a brand spanking new console. If they do, you're doing life wrong.

 

[Hyakunin Isshu]

Lord! I don't even know where to start with old Ben Croshaw! For One thing, he keeps boxing in Sony with Microsoft, as if Sony is going to ever block used games. Sony said they won't! Get your facts straight. Sony may or may not do something about used games in the future, but they didn't say anything yet, so stop attacking them, as if they did!

And secondly, he's wrong on every point. From games being more expensive to create, to "we always had backwards compatibility back in my day" He is mostly wrong.

In other words, we really, really, *really* need new consoles, for a fresh new start and for new ideas to be made. Period.

P.S. about that stupid Bertha, what if Bertha got Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U instead? If Bertha wanted to play Mass Effect 1 or 2, then.... well then you would need a PS3/360 to play them all, wouldn't you?

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Call me a traditionalist, but why the heck Microsoft and Sony are tearing up the core strengths of their consoles continues to elude me. However, I think Yahtzee's view of humans is kinda distorted. There really is the demographic he doesn't believe in.

Yes, the demographic exists, but I can't see why they are going after them.
As Jim, and others, have brought up, there are other (sometimes cheaper) devices that do the same things (other than playing games) that the X-box one says it can do, and a lot of them do those things better than the Xbone(Not mocking, just think the fake name is cooler).

 

[Darth_Payn]

Weird that Yahtzee mentioned the irony of web culture embracing his "Glorious PC Gaming Master Race" as a meme without considering the irony of his statement when, just today, MovieBob posted an article on how irony in web culture needs to be dialed down a bit.

And, in case you're wondering, these two posts fall more into the category of "Coincidental occurrence" rather than "ironic". At least that's how I see it.

this is the Internet; how often does anything meant to be "ironic" come across that way?

 

[TheNarrator]

To me, PC gaming has always been about freedom, about actually owning your system. You can do with a PC whatever you please, no one, including the manufacturers of the parts of your computer, can tell you what you can or cannot do with it. Consoles are cheaper, yes, but that's because you sell your freedom. Whenever PC gamers go on about how good their graphics are or how everyone who plays on a console is a dirty casual, I feel vicarious shame, because all they accomplish is putting people off PC gaming while not actually communicating the most important advantage of the platform.

I may be a bit fundamentalist in this, I would still prefer PC gaming even if it had worse graphics and fewer good games and was five times as expensive and regularly break, because I just can't feel comfortable with tying myself so closely to one manufacturer. The manufacturer of the hardware should not have any say in what software runs on its platform, and it shouldn't get any royalties from sold software either. That's plain and simple vendor lock in, which is anticompetitive.

 

[Clifford Beasley]

I haven't been able to get a console due to lack of room for a TV since the PS2. I've found that I have really only missed replaying some games. Most of the console exclusives haven't sold me on any console. This coming generation just sounds like trying to sell a dream machine that just gives you nightmares. I actually got a free Xbox 360 from my mom's boyfriend's brother when he moved. All it has is the power cord. It's currently sitting upside down on my floor because I found out to stream Netflix on a Xbox 360 you had to be a Live Gold subscriber. I said screw that since all it was going to do was be used by my grandfather to watch westerns on occasionally. Wish I got a PS3 instead.

As someone that grew up with an original NES it is pretty sad to see the state of things these days. I can now say things that start with "back in my day" about gaming. Blockbuster is almost dead because of streaming and Redbox. Soon you won't be able to rent games it seems. You won't be able to play your old console games with the quality of the parts in them. It will be interesting to see if 360s get to a point where used ones are rare enough for them to go for more than they originally were worth. Sorry, sort of rambled on there. Pretty much I'm just happy I like the games for PCs and I have a good PC. Maybe now we can stop dumbing down games so they can be on consoles too.