Why so little PC gamers compared to console gamers?

[LightOfDarkness]

T-T-T-Te-T-Tex-Text launch detected.


When you compare people who own a console (any console) to people who own a gaming PC that can play games from this generation....

The ratio can be a bit worrying, to say the least.

So why aren't there more PC gamers? I understand consoles get better advertising than say....a new video card that's $100, runs on the PSU that came with your pre-built and can run most of today's games that aren't riding the bleeding edge of photo-realism and/or putting optimization on the backburner, but I can assume most people have a PC with a CPU that can possibly run today's PC games (maybe with the res and effects turned down, but you get what you pay for).

Now then, I am a relatively new to the whole PC gaming scene, but getting the upgrades to play games at 40+ FPS was cheaper than getting a 360/PS3 and PC games seem to be quite cheaper than most 360 games (I guess that's the price of having to put up with a month or 2 of fun-breaking bugs). I DID get the PSU off a friend who really supported me in this endeavor though (and it was easier than I imagined, I thought I would have needed to call tech support, and it WAS new, so I don't have to worry about my PC suddenly exploding) but in total, it would've just costed me an extra $60 on top of my $112 video card. Todays pre-builts tend to focus on RAM and CPU (what you need for running applications super kicky fast) so that doesn't seem like a problem. (before you ask, the card was an XFX Radeon 5650 with 1GB of DDR3 VRAM)


I understand that there is some difficulty in going down the PC path though (is this upgrade right for me, is it too much, is it too little, does my computer support this) and it can be tough to keep up with patches, fixes and other technical hoo-ha, but that is easily solved by looking on the official forums of the game/dev of said game every once in a while (plus digital distribution is becoming mighty popular, making patching games a lot easier).


END WALL OF TEXT


inb4Pcgaming-happilydying

Also, in my school, I am the only PC gamer. Everyone else owns a 360.

FUUUUUUU-

 

[Jamieson 90]

As a parent its much easier to purchase 1 gaming console that all your kids can play on at the same time rather than lay out money for a family computer that they will all fight over.

Thats not necessarily true because most houses will have a family computer anyway so economically your probably better off getting a gaming computer anyway but I guess parents see consoles as a kids toy and gaming = a kids thing etc. Also not true but perception is all.

I own a gaming PC myself.

 

[kwagamon]

It's an issue of price, really. A current console is $200-$300 new, about half that used. You can get a computer at that price, but it will not be very good. The cheapest way to put together a good computer is to build it oneself, which as far as I'm aware is in the ballpark of $500 for something just good enough to not chop in your game of choice. A comparable computer from a store would be around $800, probably.

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

Price. It just costs too much for a top line gaming PC, and maintaining it costs even more. Consoles are very low maintenance, and stay relevant for several years.

But for me, it goes beyond that. Even if price were no object, I still could never be a PC gamer, because I hate using a keyboard/mouse, and I hate sitting hunched over my monitor. Now, if you tell me that I can run my PC through my TV and use a USB gamepad, then I'd say...I'm already doing that, it's called a PS3.

 

[BRMXJzjsoawk321]

Why are there so much more console gamers than PC?

For starters, most kids aren't educated about the PC, and I'm just going to make a good guess that kids are the main demographic for consoles.. Some people can't even handle the KB+M controls and find those two weird analog sticks to be much better for them.

Second, console gaming is cheaper than PC gaming. It is. And much more newbie-2-technology friendly than a PC is. A lot of kids I know tend to either get 23049832 viruses on their computer or somehow manage to blow it up.

Third, the companies blow millions of dollars advertising for these things. It's better for them. Less piracy, more money made because kids are more likely to go out and buy the thing that's being advertised all over the place.

Fourth, clearly a lot of people prefer consoles to PC, mostly for the games so I've been told by my friends. For one, Nintendo has all their games on their own console/portable-thingy-ma-bobber. You like Nintendo, you got a console, don't you? And what if you like Halo or Gears of War? 360. And then all those purty little PS3 exclusives there are.. Well you kind of can't compare.

 

[BRMXJzjsoawk321]

Now, if you tell me that I can run my PC through my TV and use a USB gamepad, then I'd say...I'm already doing that, it's called a PS3.

You can't possibly be implying a PS3 is a whole freakin' computer just with a controller and a TV. If it were, well then it would cost much more wouldn't it?

 

[RooftopAssassin]

This is coming from a person who plays both, but simply put; console gaming is much more convenient and cost effective. Even with the $10 a game savings a console just seems a better choice, and replacing my rig in about 6 years (already had it for 2) sounds absolutely dreadful.

 

[Jamieson 90]

I think the problem is that consoles give off the illusion of being cheaper when really there isn't that much difference between the two.

From my own experience most families will have some kind of home computer whether that be a laptop or a desktop. If you want to connect to the internet then you need an ISP which costs money.

If you then choose to purchase a console then you maybe charged to play online there as well for example on the Xbox 360.

Games on the consoles are typically more expensive as well and you may have to purchase extra controllers and leads etc for TV's. Not to mention the current generation of consoles are well known for failing or having maintenance problems.

A gaming PC combines all those aspects, sure the upfront cost is greater but you are saving money on games and you wont be charged extra to play games online since you may already have an ISP. I guess its down to preference, I knew beforehand that I wanted something that would allow to use the Internet, do my studies and work on, play music, watch films on and finally play games with so I invested in a high end gaming rig.

 

[Keava]

Little? I don't think so. PCs are still the most common platform really, in 2009 Steam had about 25 millions users registered and plenty of PC gamers don't use Steam. Various estimates place number of PC Gamers anywhere between 100-300 million.

For reference current-gen consoles apparently are about at ~150 millions units sold world wide, with Wii being most common at 70 million and xbox/ps3 holding at ~40 million each. Keep in mind those are sold units counted and so there is bunch of people owning more than 1 console, or even a PC along the way they use for gaming.

 

[Wolfram23]

OP: True that. Almost any PC bought in the last 2 years can get a mediocre video card and run games. I can only make up the numbers, but I doubt it would be any sort of exageration to say that in north america, at least 50% of people have a PC bought within 3 years ago. If they bought Intel, chances are they have 775 socket and can easily upgrade that (most of the time). Actually I helped my girlfriend upgrade her HP PC from 1.8ghz dual core to 2.8ghz dual core plus 4gb RAM (up from 2gb - did not reuse sticks) and a new motherboard (which will support quad core) for under $200. If they bought AMD, even better, because they can upgrade all the way up to a 6 core CPU if they want, or at least a quad core due to AMD having made all their CPUs for the last few years run on basically the same sockets. And if you're really savy you can get a deal on a graphics card, I have a GT 240 for PhysX that is normally $100 (CDN) which I got for $65 with a rebate.

So yeah, it's not a big deal. The problem I think is often simply lack of knowledge, and that creates unease. People are often afraid of the unknown, and in this case probably just don't want to put in the time to figure it out (tho it's pretty easy, anyone who graduated high school could research and build a PC).

The other issue is that PCs do have some compatibility issues. Not everyone knows to defrag at least monthly or to sweep registry and temp files, or to update their drivers. With a console you just download the updates as it tells you you need them, which is much less hassle. But combined with the fact that a PC doesn't have to be more expensive than a console (and when the consoles were new, you could get a gaming PC for less), games themselves are almost always at least $20 less (new), and that a PC does all kinds of other fun stuff IMO PCs are a better investment.

The sad part is, I only have 2 friends with gaming PCs. One friend I used to game with but for the last few years he's moved on from gaming and only occasionally logs onto his PS3 to play games with buddies, since nobody else games on PC. And then the other friend only plays Starcraft 2. Everyone else has PS3 or Xbox 360. Oh, and often a Mac. Stupid macs! -I say that because they're overpriced and also because for the cost of a Mac and a console you could get a fairly good gaming PC.

That said, after I got my current full time job first thing I did was get a PS3 and a 40" HDTV, and then months later I sold my old PC to my parents(used to game on it but the GPU fried and I didn't want to invest in old tech) and now am a proud owner of a $2000+ gaming PC (initial cost was around $1400 or something, but I have added to it). My PS3 is now used to stream movies and shows off my PC lol, I barely game on it anymore.

 

[TelHybrid]

As a person who plays both. Simply put; console gaming is much more convenient and cost effective. Even with the $10 a game savings a console just seems a better choice, and replacing my rig in about 6 years (already had it for 2) sounds absolutely dreadful.

It was... when it had linux support. =P

Shame Sony messed that up.

Whoops quoted wrong post. XD

 

[CrystalShadow]

Well, a lot more can go wrong with a PC.

Also, realistically; cost.

My 'gaming' PC, (which is on the cheap side of things) cost me about £700 (which is at least $1000 if not $1200)

By comparison, even the 'expensive' PS3, cost £450 or so when new.

Then there's simply the availability and kind of games that you get on the PC...

Often, games that are available on consoles as well aren't very well optimised to run on a PC, and the controls usually suffer for it.

In general, a gaming PC is expensive, and hard to use. (although it's easier today than it was when DOS was still the norm.)

If you don't know what you're doing, it's easy to mess up your PC quite badly, and getting a game to work at all can require weird technical knowledge.

With a console, generally if you know how to put a disc in it, and turn it on, you can get by...

 

[octafish]

Fourth, clearly a lot of people prefer consoles to PC, mostly for the games so I've been told by my friends. For one, Nintendo has all their games on their own console/portable-thingy-ma-bobber. You like Nintendo, you got a console, don't you? And what if you like Halo or Gears of War? 360. And then all those purty little PS3 exclusives there are.. Well you kind of can't compare.

STALKER series, The Witcher, Crysis, Oblivion (w/ mods), Morrowind (w/ mods), Fallout 3 (w/ mods), TF2 (w/ updates) RTS games. There are a bunch of PC exclusives that are worth owning a PC for, so that aspect falls down.

Mostly its because people find PCs too hard to use. People are seriously fucking stupid when taken as a whole.

 

[Wolfram23]

Well, a lot more can go wrong with a PC.

Often, games that are available on consoles as well aren't very well optimised to run on a PC, and the controls usually suffer for it.

Just have to comment on that. While I agree completely, and I hate it because my PC is practically at idle with games like that (Transformers: WfC as an example), the good news is that you can run those games with low end, cheap video cards (which are still better than console video capabilities)

 

[BRMXJzjsoawk321]

Fourth, clearly a lot of people prefer consoles to PC, mostly for the games so I've been told by my friends. For one, Nintendo has all their games on their own console/portable-thingy-ma-bobber. You like Nintendo, you got a console, don't you? And what if you like Halo or Gears of War? 360. And then all those purty little PS3 exclusives there are.. Well you kind of can't compare.

STALKER series, The Witcher, Crysis, Oblivion (w/ mods), Morrowind (w/ mods), Fallout 3 (w/ mods), TF2 (w/ updates) RTS games. There are a bunch of PC exclusives that are worth owning a PC for, so that aspect falls down.

Mostly its because people find PCs too hard to use. People are seriously fucking stupid when taken as a whole.

I'm saying that not everyone likes the games PCs have to offer. I already know all the hundreds of PC exclusives people like to throw out there. Talking about the console exclusives which people want a console for.

 

[Snotnarok]

Price. It just costs too much for a top line gaming PC, and maintaining it costs even more. Consoles are very low maintenance, and stay relevant for several years.

But for me, it goes beyond that. Even if price were no object, I still could never be a PC gamer, because I hate using a keyboard/mouse, and I hate sitting hunched over my monitor. Now, if you tell me that I can run my PC through my TV and use a USB gamepad, then I'd say...I'm already doing that, it's called a PS3.

I'm confused by your statement that maintaining a PC costs money. I've had the same PC for 4+ years and it runs any game I put in it, from 1992 to 2010. I'm not aware of any console that does that without having to buy a digital version of older games.

Before you go saying I'm some PC elitist:

Spoiler

I'm honestly confused where you get the idea you have to update your PC every 4 weeks for it to run games.

 

[Canid117]

Consoles are cheap PCs are not.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Well, a lot more can go wrong with a PC.

Often, games that are available on consoles as well aren't very well optimised to run on a PC, and the controls usually suffer for it.

Just have to comment on that. While I agree completely, and I hate it because my PC is practically at idle with games like that (Transformers: WfC as an example), the good news is that you can run those games with low end, cheap video cards (which are still better than console video capabilities)

That's true enough.
These days.

But remember why that is; Consoles are around for 5 years at a time, usually.
PC graphics hardware in particular pretty much doubles in performance every 2 years or so.

The Xbox 360 essentially contains the prototype for the first DirectX 10 graphics chips; And current low end PC hardware has definitely surpassed this point;
But that wasn't true when the Xbox launched.

The PS3 meanwhile contains a custom variant of a Geforce 7800.
That wasn't exactly slow when the console was launched, but again, PC technology now makes that look a little sad, in that even low end hardware can match that.

Consoles typically outdo all but the most expensive PC's when they're launched, but remain static while PC's keep getting faster.

So... For a little while, consoles are superior, but PC's soon overtake them again.

 

[Zeetoboy]

Computers and Consoles are very, very different. Consoles have a single video card that is universal throughout every console, so its easier to make games that will run on that video card because you know the specifications. with PC game makers its a shot in the dark to make a game that will run on the majority of systems, its more of a risk for the developers. See Also = Crysis. Made a game that looked nice but was really processor intensive. i cant imagine that game made too much money because not many computers i know can handle it even at the lowest graphics.