Let's squash this myth that PC gaming isnt much more expensive than consoles.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]

Average cost of PC game vs console is $10 less. 1 game a month = $120 over 5 years = $600 XBL/year = $50 over 5 years = $250 Hmmmm $850 over 5 years before I've bought wi-fi or chargers/batteries (how much does 5 years worth of batteries cost?) or even a bloomin HD TV to play it on (because only super gaming PC rigs count right, but not including the price of an HDTV for a console works somehow) or HD cables etc etc. I'm not saying that PC gaming is cheaper, but its also ridiculous to argue it costs $1000's more that some consolites on here seem to imagine.

EDIT oops I forgot xbl is now $60 a year from nov so add on another $50

i dont buy 1 game a month between all 3 of my consoles and my pc combined.

[QUOTE="TerrorRizzing"][QUOTE="markinthedark"]

lots of people bought PS3s as blu ray players....

blue_hazy_basic

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="roxlimn"]markinthdark: Okay, now I know why you got laid off. Get with the times, man. Companies don't work like that anymore.roxlimn

yea they do, my sister is an IT manager at IBM... its the same thing...

why are you telling me how an IT department works when you have never worked in one?

all right, well i think you dont have a clue what you are talking about.... and it doesnt matter because this is completely off topic.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]

Average cost of PC game vs console is $10 less. 1 game a month = $120 over 5 years = $600 XBL/year = $50 over 5 years = $250 Hmmmm $850 over 5 years before I've bought wi-fi or chargers/batteries (how much does 5 years worth of batteries cost?) or even a bloomin HD TV to play it on (because only super gaming PC rigs count right, but not including the price of an HDTV for a console works somehow) or HD cables etc etc. I'm not saying that PC gaming is cheaper, but its also ridiculous to argue it costs $1000's more that some consolites on here seem to imagine.

EDIT oops I forgot xbl is now $60 a year from nov so add on another $50

blue_hazy_basic

i dont buy 1 game a month between all 3 of my consoles and my pc combined.

i guess it doesnt, as this is a discussion of hardware costs and for some reason hermits keep bringing up software costs....

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]

Average cost of PC game vs console is $10 less. 1 game a month = $120 over 5 years = $600 XBL/year = $50 over 5 years = $250 Hmmmm $850 over 5 years before I've bought wi-fi or chargers/batteries (how much does 5 years worth of batteries cost?) or even a bloomin HD TV to play it on (because only super gaming PC rigs count right, but not including the price of an HDTV for a console works somehow) or HD cables etc etc. I'm not saying that PC gaming is cheaper, but its also ridiculous to argue it costs $1000's more that some consolites on here seem to imagine.

EDIT oops I forgot xbl is now $60 a year from nov so add on another $50

blue_hazy_basic

i dont buy 1 game a month between all 3 of my consoles and my pc combined.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="markinthedark"]

i dont buy 1 game a month between all 3 of my consoles and my pc combined.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="markinthedark"]

i dont buy 1 game a month between all 3 of my consoles and my pc combined.

i guess it doesnt, as this is a discussion of hardware costs and for some reason hermits keep bringing up software costs....

i guess it doesnt, as this is a discussion of hardware costs and for some reason hermits keep bringing up software costs....

markinthedark

This is a discussion of GAMING cost.

[QUOTE="SakusEnvoy"]

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] OK? What does that matter?blue_hazy_basic

you can also sell used games you have no desire to play anymore... and you can rent games, or borrow games from friends free of charge. Alot of new releases come with $10-20 preorder credits too.

and in generations past PC games cost the same as console games, this is the first gen where there is actually a premium... last gen game prices were equal.

Even the software argument doesnt really stack up well... because if you buy all your retail PC games on release day, and all your retail console games on release day... but you sell all your console games when you are done playing them... its probably significantly cheaper to play console games.

you can also sell used games you have no desire to play anymore... and you can rent games, or borrow games from friends free of charge. Alot of new releases come with $10-20 preorder credits too.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

i guess it doesnt, as this is a discussion of hardware costs and for some reason hermits keep bringing up software costs....

Mograine

This is a discussion of GAMING cost.

fine how do we put the cost into perspective?... some guy is talking about buying 12 games a month.. when im pretty sure the attach rate for console gamers is around 7 or 8 games per console.... which is more like 1-2 games a year.

the main problem with price comparisons is that regardless if i play games or not I'll still be getting a new PC about every 5-6 years. if i didn't game that PC would probably still cost me about 500 bucks. if i want it to be a gaming rig it would be basically the cost of a good upper middle class video card. that would be about 200-300 bucks. that's about the cost of a console.Ontain

More or less this. You're about as likely to invest in a new PC every 5-6 years as you are investing in a new TV. Making that PC into a gaming rig with staying power won't cost you much more than a console will and it'll certainly be cheaper in the long run.

I think the average PC Gamers spend more than the average console gamer. Generally I'd agree that PC gaming tend to be more expensive. But...

For the whole 'how much would it cost for 10 years of gaming, it seems a little silly to assume that you'd not spend a fair bit of money on a basic PC even if you were planning to never game on it. Also remember that 10 years of gaming on an X360 would result in an additional $500 worth of Xbox Live.

So a base cost of $400 at launch plus $500 worth of Xbox live plus the cost of a basic non-gaming PC (3-400 given the higher prices at the time). So Console gaming over a decade would still be well over $1000 even assuming you only bought a single console. It's also not counting any upgrades to your home PC, no extra controller, no cost associated with buying an HD TV.

Judging the price of a PC is obviously harder. I won't try to make an argument for whether or not you could buy a gaming PC and keep it upgraded at a 'reasonable' level for a decade for 1000-1200, I doubt most gamers would want to. Personally I've spent at least $2000 over the last decade. I could easily have saved some (I recently bought a new 5850 video card even though I could easily have stuck with my old 1GB 8800GT for another year or two), I could also easily have spent more (I'm still running a Dual Core instead of a Quad Core).

Then there's the argument for the cheaper PC games. While it's true that most PC games retail for about $10 less than most PC games, consoles do have much better options when it comes to renting games. While STEAM have some awesome sales now and then, sales on console games are not rare either, for example, the last two console titles I bought at launch I only paid $50 for since Frys in my area tend to offer a sale on new 'high profile' console titles. In addition to that you do have the option of selling console titles. So yeah, pc games on average tend to be a bit cheaper but you don't get the option of renting or selling the games.

Is PC gaming more expensive than buying and playing on a single console? Yes, outside of exceptional scenarios it is, however it doesn't have to be a lot more expansive as long as you're sensible about your upgrades. It also does give you access to FAR more titles, better graphics on high end modern titles, a HUGE back catalog of older games, far better customization in terms of mods and user made content, far more versatility in terms of what else you can do with the machine.

So yes PC gaming is more expensive, but you also get a lot more for your money.

fine how do we put the cost into perspective?... some guy is talking about buying 12 games a month.. when im pretty sure the attach rate for console gamers is around 7 or 8 games per console.... which is more like 1-2 games a year.

markinthedark

7 or 8 games per console?

What :lol: ?

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

you can also sell used games you have no desire to play anymore... and you can rent games, or borrow games from friends free of charge. Alot of new releases come with $10-20 preorder credits too.

>blue_hazy_basic

how can you lend games to friends and sell them when you were just saying the reason PC gaming is cheaper is because of steam? If you buy all your games off steam, i dont see how anyone is borrowing those... or how you are selling them.

You pay more you get more.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

fine how do we put the cost into perspective?... some guy is talking about buying 12 games a month.. when im pretty sure the attach rate for console gamers is around 7 or 8 games per console.... which is more like 1-2 games a year.

Mograine

7 or 8 games per console?

What :lol: ?

"At 35.7 million PS3 units sold, that puts the attach rate at 8.1. The 360 has 40.2 million lifetime sales, for an attach rate of 8.8."

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2010/05/15/ps3_game_attach_rate_closes_in_on_xbox_360_s

Console gamers only really need to buy the high profile titles they plan on playing for a long period of time. They can simply rent everything else.

This thread still going? The myth remains un-squashed and as PC gaming continues to get cheaper your argument will only get weaker.

you can also sell used games you have no desire to play anymore... and you can rent games, or borrow games from friends free of charge. Alot of new releases come with $10-20 preorder credits too.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

fine how do we put the cost into perspective?... some guy is talking about buying 12 games a month.. when im pretty sure the attach rate for console gamers is around 7 or 8 games per console.... which is more like 1-2 games a year.

markinthedark

7 or 8 games per console?

What :lol: ?

"At 35.7 million PS3 units sold, that puts the attach rate at 8.1. The 360 has 40.2 million lifetime sales, for an attach rate of 8.8."

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2010/05/15/ps3_game_attach_rate_closes_in_on_xbox_360_s

Console gamers only really need to buy the high profile titles they plan on playing for a long period of time. They can simply rent everything else.

So which argument are you picking? The one where console gamers get all this money back for selling games or the one where they don't buy games and so don't pay for them?

[QUOTE="Ontain"]the main problem with price comparisons is that regardless if i play games or not I'll still be getting a new PC about every 5-6 years. if i didn't game that PC would probably still cost me about 500 bucks. if i want it to be a gaming rig it would be basically the cost of a good upper middle class video card. that would be about 200-300 bucks. that's about the cost of a console.Filthybastrd

More or less this. You're about as likely to invest in a new PC every 5-6 years as you are investing in a new TV. Making that PC into a gaming rig with staying power won't cost you much more than a console will and it'll certainly be cheaper in the long run.

By 2005, it's just seemed like that's changed. Entry-level dual core processors (like the X2 3800+) have speeds suitable to handle a productive balance of several internet pages, Office and Word without so much as a hitch.

Recently I just bought a new gaming rig with an i5 760 processor, because my last computer is now 5 years old. I can honestly say this is the first computer upgrade I ever made that I would not have made were I not a gamer. My i5 760 is fast, but it simply hasn't improved my productivity for basic computers tasks like internet surfing or word processing. And 5 years into the future, it's really hard to imagine any word program or internet page will run circles around my i5 760.

I think this is why we're seeing the rise of netbooks in the last couple of years. Because even basic, entry-level PC power is starting to reach the point where it is "good enough" for everyday users.

you can also sell used games you have no desire to play anymore... and you can rent games, or borrow games from friends free of charge. Alot of new releases come with $10-20 preorder credits too.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

7 or 8 games per console?

What :lol: ?

1080pOnly

"At 35.7 million PS3 units sold, that puts the attach rate at 8.1. The 360 has 40.2 million lifetime sales, for an attach rate of 8.8."

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2010/05/15/ps3_game_attach_rate_closes_in_on_xbox_360_s

Console gamers only really need to buy the high profile titles they plan on playing for a long period of time. They can simply rent everything else.

So which argument are you picking? The one where console gamers get all this money back for selling games or the one where they don't buy games and so don't pay for them?

depends on the gamer and depends on the game, if its got a 20 pre order credit... i usually pre order and sell. If its a game i plan to play for a long period... i buy it and keep it. If its a short game I can beat in a weekend, i rent it.

hell for $22 a month you can a gamefly account and play every single game across all 3 platforms.

Console gamers have quite a few options outside of purchasing every game they want to play at full retail price...

How did lending Starcraft 2 to your friends work out?xsubtownerx

They downloaded the game from my B.net account and took turns at using my account.

So?

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

[QUOTE="Ontain"]the main problem with price comparisons is that regardless if i play games or not I'll still be getting a new PC about every 5-6 years. if i didn't game that PC would probably still cost me about 500 bucks. if i want it to be a gaming rig it would be basically the cost of a good upper middle class video card. that would be about 200-300 bucks. that's about the cost of a console.SakusEnvoy

More or less this. You're about as likely to invest in a new PC every 5-6 years as you are investing in a new TV. Making that PC into a gaming rig with staying power won't cost you much more than a console will and it'll certainly be cheaper in the long run.

By 2005, it's just seemed like that's changed. Entry-level dual core processors (like the X2 3800+) have speeds suitable to handle a productive balance of several open internet pages, Office and word.

Recently I just bought a new gaming rig with an i5 760 processor, because my last computer is now 5 years old. I can honestly say this is the first computer upgrade I ever made that I would not have made were I not a gamer. My i5 760 is fast, but it simply hasn't improved my productivity for basic computers tasks like internet surfing or word processing. And 5 years into the future, it's really hard to imagine any word program or internet page will run circles around my i5 760.

I think this is why we're seeing the rise of netbooks in the last couple of years. Because even basic, entry-level PC power is starting to reach the point where it is "good enough" for everyday users.

I agree. At the same time, it also seems to me that gaming requirements are going the same way. I don't see any need to upgrade my rig within the next few years and I would'nt have bothered switching out my GTX285 had I not been an enthusiast.

In fact, I don't think any of my I7 920 cores has ever exceeded 30/40% during gaming.

And yeah, I'll SLI my GTX460 sooner or later but that's not relevant at all since it's about as wise a decision as switching between GTX285/GTX460 which "should" give you no improvement whatsoever (It does for me but that's besides the point).

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]How did lending Starcraft 2 to your friends work out?Mograine

They downloaded the game from my B.net account and took turns at using my account.

So?

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]How did lending Starcraft 2 to your friends work out?Mograine

They downloaded the game from my B.net account and took turns at using my account.

So?

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]How did lending Starcraft 2 to your friends work out?xsubtownerx

They downloaded the game from my B.net account and took turns at using my account.

So?

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

[QUOTE="Ontain"]the main problem with price comparisons is that regardless if i play games or not I'll still be getting a new PC about every 5-6 years. if i didn't game that PC would probably still cost me about 500 bucks. if i want it to be a gaming rig it would be basically the cost of a good upper middle class video card. that would be about 200-300 bucks. that's about the cost of a console.SakusEnvoy

More or less this. You're about as likely to invest in a new PC every 5-6 years as you are investing in a new TV. Making that PC into a gaming rig with staying power won't cost you much more than a console will and it'll certainly be cheaper in the long run.

By 2005, it's just seemed like that's changed. Entry-level dual core processors (like the X2 3800+) have speeds suitable to handle a productive balance of several internet pages, Office and Word without so much as a hitch.

Recently I just bought a new gaming rig with an i5 760 processor, because my last computer is now 5 years old. I can honestly say this is the first computer upgrade I ever made that I would not have made were I not a gamer. My i5 760 is fast, but it simply hasn't improved my productivity for basic computers tasks like internet surfing or word processing. And 5 years into the future, it's really hard to imagine any word program or internet page will run circles around my i5 760.

I think this is why we're seeing the rise of netbooks in the last couple of years. Because even basic, entry-level PC power is starting to reach the point where it is "good enough" for everyday users.

This is true but it only backs up what I say about PC gaming getting cheaper. At the moment hardware is ahead of software and so gaming rigs are lasting far longer than before and are costing far less.

This trend will eventually change - we can actually use any amount of computing power for productivity, in ways you haven't yet thought of, but actually programming the software to make use of it has become so complex it is not feasible right now.

This will change as programmers and coding methods become improved but while games take hundreds of people and millions of dollars to make the jumps won't be so big or fast.

Now is a good time to be in PC gaming from a cost perspective. 5 Years ago was a bad time as software was in advance of hardware.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="markinthedark"]

you can also sell used games you have no desire to play anymore... and you can rent games, or borrow games from friends free of charge. Alot of new releases come with $10-20 preorder credits too.

>xsubtownerx

I hope your friend is equally as talented as you in competitive play, or your -personal- record might suffer.xsubtownerx

You were sayin'?

[QUOTE="SakusEnvoy"]

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

More or less this. You're about as likely to invest in a new PC every 5-6 years as you are investing in a new TV. Making that PC into a gaming rig with staying power won't cost you much more than a console will and it'll certainly be cheaper in the long run.

Filthybastrd

By 2005, it's just seemed like that's changed. Entry-level dual core processors (like the X2 3800+) have speeds suitable to handle a productive balance of several open internet pages, Office and word.

Recently I just bought a new gaming rig with an i5 760 processor, because my last computer is now 5 years old. I can honestly say this is the first computer upgrade I ever made that I would not have made were I not a gamer. My i5 760 is fast, but it simply hasn't improved my productivity for basic computers tasks like internet surfing or word processing. And 5 years into the future, it's really hard to imagine any word program or internet page will run circles around my i5 760.

I think this is why we're seeing the rise of netbooks in the last couple of years. Because even basic, entry-level PC power is starting to reach the point where it is "good enough" for everyday users.

I agree. At the same time, it also seems to me that gaming requirements are going the same way. I don't see any need to upgrade my rig within the next few years and I would'nt have bothered switching out my GTX285 had I not been an enthusiast.

In fact, I don't think any of my I7 920 cores has ever exceeded 30/40% during gaming.

And yeah, I'll SLI my GTX460 sooner or later but that's not relevant at all since it's about as wise a decision as switching between GTX285/GTX460 which "should" give you no improvement whatsoever (It does for me but that's besides the point).

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

[QUOTE="Ontain"]the main problem with price comparisons is that regardless if i play games or not I'll still be getting a new PC about every 5-6 years. if i didn't game that PC would probably still cost me about 500 bucks. if i want it to be a gaming rig it would be basically the cost of a good upper middle class video card. that would be about 200-300 bucks. that's about the cost of a console.SakusEnvoy

More or less this. You're about as likely to invest in a new PC every 5-6 years as you are investing in a new TV. Making that PC into a gaming rig with staying power won't cost you much more than a console will and it'll certainly be cheaper in the long run.

By 2005, it's just seemed like that's changed. Entry-level dual core processors (like the X2 3800+) have speeds suitable to handle a productive balance of several internet pages, Office and Word without so much as a hitch.

Recently I just bought a new gaming rig with an i5 760 processor, because my last computer is now 5 years old. I can honestly say this is the first computer upgrade I ever made that I would not have made were I not a gamer. My i5 760 is fast, but it simply hasn't improved my productivity for basic computers tasks like internet surfing or word processing. And 5 years into the future, it's really hard to imagine any word program or internet page will run circles around my i5 760.

I think this is why we're seeing the rise of netbooks in the last couple of years. Because even basic, entry-level PC power is starting to reach the point where it is "good enough" for everyday users.

Realistically i have no idea what i would have spent otherwise, the need to upgrade for PC games always came well before the need to upgrade to browse the web.

The same argument can be made for consoles though.... everyone pretty much needed to buy a dvd player around the time of PS2... so you could easily subtract the cost of a comparable dvd player. Which probably brings the ps2 down to around a $100 cost premium.

and format standards were changing again around the time of the PS3, so you can subtract the cost of a blu ray player off the price of a launch ps3. Which also bring the ps3 down to around a $200 cost premium.

so we can say a $300 cost premium for gaming on consoles over a 12 year period.

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] You do know ebay exists right? :? And this may shock you, but not only have I bought PC games second hand but i've lent them to friends too!! :oblue_hazy_basic

my buddy lent me madden 09 and it played just fine. ;)

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="xsubtownerx"] How did lending Starcraft 2 to your friends work out?markinthedark

my buddy lent me madden 09 and it played just fine. ;)

[QUOTE="1080pOnly"]

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

"At 35.7 million PS3 units sold, that puts the attach rate at 8.1. The 360 has 40.2 million lifetime sales, for an attach rate of 8.8."

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2010/05/15/ps3_game_attach_rate_closes_in_on_xbox_360_s

Console gamers only really need to buy the high profile titles they plan on playing for a long period of time. They can simply rent everything else.

markinthedark

So which argument are you picking? The one where console gamers get all this money back for selling games or the one where they don't buy games and so don't pay for them?

depends on the gamer and depends on the game, if its got a 20 pre order credit... i usually pre order and sell. If its a game i plan to play for a long period... i buy it and keep it. If its a short game I can beat in a weekend, i rent it.

hell for $22 a month you can a gamefly account and play every single game across all 3 platforms.

Console gamers have quite a few options outside of purchasing every game they want to play at full retail price...

You cannot use both arguments though as if one is not directly linked to the other. For the gamer that mostly rents they get no re-sale value and the gamer that mostly buys gets no value from renting. I could equally argue that all PC games can be downloaded for free and thus the PC costs nothing to game on once bought. This argument is circular though as we both know people buy games in some quantity and when they do it is more expensive on console and that is pure fact.

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]] How did lending Starcraft 2 to your friends work out?blue_hazy_basic

Realistically i have no idea what i would have spent otherwise, the need to upgrade for PC games always came well before the need to upgrade to browse the web.

The same argument can be made for consoles though.... everyone pretty much needed to buy a dvd player around the time of PS2... so you could easily subtract the cost of a comparable dvd player. Which probably brings the ps2 down to around a $100 cost premium.

and format standards were changing again around the time of the PS3, so you can subtract the cost of a blu ray player off the price of a launch ps3. Which also bring the ps3 down to around a $200 cost premium.

so we can say a $300 cost premium for gaming on consoles over a 12 year period.

markinthedark

You don't need a DVD or Bluray player but you need a PC in this modern world. PC's also came with DVD players so you would have to subtract that from the PC too equalling out the difference.

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

[QUOTE="1080pOnly"]

So which argument are you picking? The one where console gamers get all this money back for selling games or the one where they don't buy games and so don't pay for them?

1080pOnly

depends on the gamer and depends on the game, if its got a 20 pre order credit... i usually pre order and sell. If its a game i plan to play for a long period... i buy it and keep it. If its a short game I can beat in a weekend, i rent it.

hell for $22 a month you can a gamefly account and play every single game across all 3 platforms.

Console gamers have quite a few options outside of purchasing every game they want to play at full retail price...

You cannot use both arguments though as if one is not directly linked to the other. For the gamer that mostly rents they get no re-sale value and the gamer that mostly buys gets no value from renting. I could equally argue that all PC games can be downloaded for free and thus the PC costs nothing to game on once bought. This argument is circular though as we both know people buy games in some quantity and when they do it is more expensive on console and that is pure fact.

we are talking about being able to play current retail games... i dont know of any of those that can be downloaded for free.

and the select group of big titles which are responsible for the vast majority of console software sales... usually have a $10-20 game credit available for preordering.

Yes, PC gaming is a lot more expensive (I could buy both HD consoles for the money I spent on my PC), but hey, you need a PC anyway don't you? A respectable gaming PC that you build yourself only costs a little more than the average store bought PC most people have.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]] How did lending Starcraft 2 to your friends work out?xsubtownerx

[QUOTE="markinthedark"]

Realistically i have no idea what i would have spent otherwise, the need to upgrade for PC games always came well before the need to upgrade to browse the web.

The same argument can be made for consoles though.... everyone pretty much needed to buy a dvd player around the time of PS2... so you could easily subtract the cost of a comparable dvd player. Which probably brings the ps2 down to around a $100 cost premium.

and format standards were changing again around the time of the PS3, so you can subtract the cost of a blu ray player off the price of a launch ps3. Which also bring the ps3 down to around a $200 cost premium.

so we can say a $300 cost premium for gaming on consoles over a 12 year period.

1080pOnly

You don't need a DVD or Bluray player but you need a PC in this modern world. PC's also came with DVD players so you would have to subtract that from the PC too equalling out the difference.

So what you are saying is you have never purchased a stand alone dvd player in your life because you have always had a dvd drive on your PC?

im gonna call BS on that one. Everyone i know has a standalone dvd player in addition to a DVD drive on their pc.

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] Didn't buy it :P How did your friends fare playing EA games like Madden online that you lent them?blue_hazy_basic

we are talking about being able to play current retail games... i dont know of any of those that can be downloaded for free.

and the select group of big titles which are responsible for the vast majority of console software sales... usually have a $10-20 game credit available for preordering.

markinthedark

Yes we are and the process is extremely simple, not going to be explained by me, and is the reason piracy is such a problem on PC. Now you start with pre-ordering...which is great if the game doesn't flop hard but this is also countered by PC titles also having pre-order bonuses. I just bought Amnesia: The dark descent, full retail price £10.39 through Steam.

Face it man, console games cost more than PC games - it's a fact known by everyone here really and i'm not sure how you can argue against it.