Why do people think PC gaming is much expensive

It seems some misintererpreted what I said. I meant "for real". Gaming was on the verge of extinction before the NES came (it really was, look it up), thanks to an explosive number of consoles and bad games. Was the Odyssey popular? No. If we are going for starting it all, Brown Box was the first real console. It was just not released to the public. NES made gaming mainstream, and that's not just my opinion. All gaming sites pretty much agree on this fact, along with the general public.calvinsora

[QUOTE="clubsammich91"]Now I fear PC gaming is the thing that has to be kept on life support.Vandalvideo

In your personal opinion, yes? I haven't notice such an explosion of ultra-high quality exclusives last year, or can you name more than five examples?

In your personal opinion, yes? I haven't notice such an explosion of ultra-high quality exclusives last year, or can you name more than five examples?calvinsora

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]It seems some misintererpreted what I said. I meant "for real". Gaming was on the verge of extinction before the NES came (it really was, look it up), thanks to an explosive number of consoles and bad games. Was the Odyssey popular? No. If we are going for starting it all, Brown Box was the first real console. It was just not released to the public. NES made gaming mainstream, and that's not just my opinion. All gaming sites pretty much agree on this fact, along with the general public.Vandalvideo

Alive? Yes. Booming? Not as much as it did with the NES, that's for sure. The Atari 2600 was, to the best of my knowledge, the biggest traditional console, but it also fell down hard in the crash. Has the industry ever fallen again after the NES? No.

Alive? Yes. Booming? Not as much as it did with the NES, that's for sure. The Atari 2600 was, to the best of my knowledge, the biggest traditional console, but it also fell down hard in the crash. Has the industry ever fallen again after the NES? No.calvinsora

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]In your personal opinion, yes? I haven't notice such an explosion of ultra-high quality exclusives last year, or can you name more than five examples?Vandalvideo

I'm also basing my point on general reviews. I'm sorry, but I've noticed more high-rated consolegames and exclusivesthan PC games, at least on GS. I feel it is a slippery slope to base all of it on professional reviews, but thats just me.

I'm also basing my point on general reviews. I'm sorry, but I've noticed more high-rated consolegames and exclusivesthan PC games, at least on GS. I feel it is a slippery slope to base all of it on professional reviews, but thats just me.calvinsora

PC gaming costs less now than it used to. Back in the early 2000s graphics cards used to get outdated much quicker than they do now. A high end 8800gtx from 2006 can still max out most games no problem. Partially due to less graphically demanding games coming out now. To play multiplatform games that are decently optimized, high end 2006 hardware is very good.

[QUOTE="bcroger"]

-PC gaming doesent require a TV.

Snagal123

But it does require a monitor.

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]Alive? Yes. Booming? Not as much as it did with the NES, that's for sure. The Atari 2600 was, to the best of my knowledge, the biggest traditional console, but it also fell down hard in the crash. Has the industry ever fallen again after the NES? No.Vandalvideo

I didn't say it wasn't booming. I said it wasn't as booming as the NES. It's also important to note that the perspective on gaming changed slightly after the NES. It became more mainstream in the eyes of the general public. I'm just saying: without the NES, regardless of what came before it, the gaming industry wouldn't be what it is today. Of course, the legacy of the older consoles can't be forgotten, and sorry if it came across that way.

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]I'm also basing my point on general reviews. I'm sorry, but I've noticed more high-rated consolegames and exclusivesthan PC games, at least on GS. I feel it is a slippery slope to base all of it on professional reviews, but thats just me.Vandalvideo

On Gamespot, or overall. I tend to take GS more seriously than other sites. I'm just saying, I believe myself quite informed on games getting high scores here on GS, but if I'm wrong, I humbly apologize.

I didn't say it wasn't booming. I said it wasn't as booming as the NES. It's also important to note that the perspective on gaming changed slightly after the NES. It became more mainstream in the eyes of the general public. I'm just saying: without the NES, regardless of what came before it, the gaming industry wouldn't be what it is today. Of course, the legacy of the older consoles can't be forgotten, and sorry if it came across that way.calvinsora

My question is if PC gaming is so much better why do they stick around on a forum that is dominated by console gamers? Hermits can go join some higher quality forum, you wont be missed.

brennan7777

On Gamespot, or overall. I tend to take GS more seriously than other sites. I'm just saying, I believe myself quite informed on games getting high scores here on GS, but if I'm wrong, I humbly apologize.calvinsora

Gamespot rated Shattered Horizon 7.5. Gamespot rated the steaming turd that was Cryostasis 8.0. (I really disliked the game; can you tell?) Please explain why one is a game and the other is not, given a difference of 5%. Oh, and don't bother trying to weasel out using the "and other review sites" part of your statement. Shattered Horizon has a higher Metacritic score than Cryostasis (both reviewer and user score), so I'm actually doing you a favor by letting you argue solely on GS score.lowe0

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="clubsammich91"]Now I fear PC gaming is the thing that has to be kept on life support.calvinsora

In your personal opinion, yes? I haven't notice such an explosion of ultra-high quality exclusives last year, or can you name more than five examples?

Empire Total War

Aion

Wrath of the Lich King

Dawn of War 2

Arma2

Clear Sky

Sims 3

I can go on you know? Can you name me over 5 good xbox 360 exclusives last year or even ps3?

Except that you're the one that claimed it was a tech demo, not a game. It's up to you to prove that reviewers and/or those who've tried it weren't amused by the game.lowe0

[QUOTE="brennan7777"]

My question is if PC gaming is so much better why do they stick around on a forum that is dominated by console gamers? Hermits can go join some higher quality forum, you wont be missed.

Zerkrender

I rarely see PC gamers calling themselves rich and console owners poor, because we know it doesnt cost that much than consoles more for a gaming pc. Its an especially rewarding experience when you build your pc yourself as you have learned something of value, saved money and have a nice gaming platform at the same time.

The thing is, buying a pc and a console works out around the same as buying a gaming pc (and thats not including the price of extra's like live). The money you save due to cheaper games on the pc is easily enough to cover upgrades, and if you really want to nitpick, "any additional power bills". I've decided that considering the extra power and the better quality and variety (imo of course) of pc games, I'm not going to bother with whatever the next gen consoles will be and just stick with pc.

JONO51

In fact it will probably cost more to buy a regular pc and a console than just a gaming pc

[QUOTE="lowe0"] Gamespot rated Shattered Horizon 7.5. Gamespot rated the steaming turd that was Cryostasis 8.0. (I really disliked the game; can you tell?) Please explain why one is a game and the other is not, given a difference of 5%. Oh, and don't bother trying to weasel out using the "and other review sites" part of your statement. Shattered Horizon has a higher Metacritic score than Cryostasis (both reviewer and user score), so I'm actually doing you a favor by letting you argue solely on GS score.mo0ksi

[QUOTE="Zerkrender"][QUOTE="brennan7777"]

My question is if PC gaming is so much better why do they stick around on a forum that is dominated by console gamers? Hermits can go join some higher quality forum, you wont be missed.

Sausageson

I rarely see PC gamers calling themselves rich and console owners poor, because we know it doesnt cost that much than consoles more for a gaming pc. Its an especially rewarding experience when you build your pc yourself as you have learned something of value, saved money and have a nice gaming platform at the same time.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]Except that you're the one that claimed it was a tech demo, not a game. It's up to you to prove that reviewers and/or those who've tried it weren't amused by the game.Vandalvideo

[QUOTE="Sausageson"]

[QUOTE="Zerkrender"] It physically hurt them that we would dare prefer consoles over PC as it IS affecting PC gaming despite what they tell themselves and it Is more popular despite what they argue. Others know we're young teens who can't get jobs so they rub what an income can do for you in our faces. :(Zerkrender

I rarely see PC gamers calling themselves rich and console owners poor, because we know it doesnt cost that much than consoles more for a gaming pc. Its an especially rewarding experience when you build your pc yourself as you have learned something of value, saved money and have a nice gaming platform at the same time.

[QUOTE="mo0ksi"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"] Gamespot rated Shattered Horizon 7.5. Gamespot rated the steaming turd that was Cryostasis 8.0. (I really disliked the game; can you tell?) Please explain why one is a game and the other is not, given a difference of 5%. Oh, and don't bother trying to weasel out using the "and other review sites" part of your statement. Shattered Horizon has a higher Metacritic score than Cryostasis (both reviewer and user score), so I'm actually doing you a favor by letting you argue solely on GS score.lowe0

[QUOTE="Sausageson"]

[QUOTE="Zerkrender"] It physically hurt them that we would dare prefer consoles over PC as it IS affecting PC gaming despite what they tell themselves and it Is more popular despite what they argue. Others know we're young teens who can't get jobs so they rub what an income can do for you in our faces. :(Zerkrender

I rarely see PC gamers calling themselves rich and console owners poor, because we know it doesnt cost that much than consoles more for a gaming pc. Its an especially rewarding experience when you build your pc yourself as you have learned something of value, saved money and have a nice gaming platform at the same time.

Its not expensive!

If you are a teenager, next time your parents are going to buy a crap pc from dell paying thousands, tell them your going to build it and ask for funding. Buy the parts, a kit usually comes with a manual, its not hard at all and you learn something of value that you can use later on in life. Your parents now dont have to buy a console for you, also you save a crapload on games because of services like steam which is has incredible deals. Also PC owners usually post high end screens when lemmings and cows argue that uncharted 2 or some other game looks better than crysis or clear sky. After all a picture is worth a thousand words and trying to argue the graphics of a game with words is fail.

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="calvinsora"] Are we forgetting that consoles started the gaming business for real (hint: it was the NES).calvinsora

I said started it "for real". Not the same in any way. Of course gaming existed before the NES, I have a rather good grasp on what consoles existed before and after certain consoles. But before NES (more specifically, Super Mario Bros.), gaming was in a huge slump, and many predicted its extinction. Don't deny the NES's influence, that's just silly.

You say the NES started it for real, then in a later post you say PC gaming was still Alive but just not as mainstream as the NES. Does that mean Wii's started gaming because it is more mainstream than the NES was?

NES sales: 61.91 million

Generation 2 consoles:

Atari 2600 sales: 30 million, counted in2004
Magnavox Odyssey: 2 million
Intellivision: 3 million
Atari 5200 sales: reportedly in excess over 1 million
Arcadia 2001 sales: ultimately in excess over 2 million

There were no sources that I could find about Fairchild Channel F, Vectrex, Bally Astrocade and Sega SG-1000 sales, so it could be said that the numbers were indefinite and not particularly high. But even if we'd estimate that about 1 million were sold of each console, and heighten the excess number to one million over the excess standard, the aggregate sales of second generation consoles (first generation is such a loose term that I think no solid numbers exist except for the Pong home version, which sold about 150000 copies total) is around 44 million, which is two-thirds of the NES's sales total. That's not including all the consoles that competed with the NES in the console war. If you can come with numbers that say otherwise, I think it's safe to say the NES was in itself most popular console at its time. Add to the fact that for 20 years, Super Mario Bros. remained the highest-selling game of all time (40.24 million copies sold, not counting VC and GBA sales), and you can't deny how huge NES was.

Wikipedia was used as a reference for most of the sales, and I believe it to be accurate. If it isn't, the difference can only be about (+ or -) 1 million.

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"] Hah! Forgetting the Commodore, Amiga, and all the fine PC-engine gaming platforms are we?Sausageson

I said started it "for real". Not the same in any way. Of course gaming existed before the NES, I have a rather good grasp on what consoles existed before and after certain consoles. But before NES (more specifically, Super Mario Bros.), gaming was in a huge slump, and many predicted its extinction. Don't deny the NES's influence, that's just silly.

You say the NES started it for real, then in a later post you say PC gaming was still Alive but just not as mainstream as the NES. Does that mean Wii's started gaming because it is more mainstream than the NES was?

Gaming had already become a rather reputable medium before the Wii, but it's impossible to deny that the Wii has proven to have made the gaming industry even bigger, reaching out to morepeople of wider ages. Are people really trying to deny the fact that the NES resuscitated gaming from almost certain death? You know it was about to disappear into nothingness, yes?

NES sales: 61.91 million

Generation 2 consoles:

Atari 2600 sales: 30 million, counted in2004
Magnavox Odyssey: 2 million
Intellivision: 3 million
Atari 5200 sales: reportedly in excess over 1 million
Arcadia 2001 sales: ultimately in excess over 2 million

There were no sources that I could find about Fairchild Channel F, Vectrex, Bally Astrocade and Sega SG-1000 sales, so it could be said that the numbers were indefinite and not particularly high. But even if we'd estimate that about 1 million were sold of each console, and heighten the excess number to one million over the excess standard, the aggregate sales of second generation consoles (first generation is such a loose term that I think no solid numbers exist except for the Pong home version, which sold about 150000 copies total) is around 44 million, which is two-thirds of the NES's sales total. That's not including all the consoles that competed with the NES in the console war. If you can come with numbers that say otherwise, I think it's safe to say the NES was in itself most popular console at its time. Add to the fact that for 20 years, Super Mario Bros. remained the highest-selling game of all time (40.24 million copies sold, not counting VC and GBA sales), and you can't deny how huge NES was.

Wikipedia was used as a reference for most of the sales, and I believe it to be accurate. If it isn't, the difference can only be about (+ or -) 1 million.

calvinsora

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]On Gamespot, or overall. I tend to take GS more seriously than other sites. I'm just saying, I believe myself quite informed on games getting high scores here on GS, but if I'm wrong, I humbly apologize.Vandalvideo

Thanks, I'll check it out ;)

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]

NES sales: 61.91 million

Generation 2 consoles:

Atari 2600 sales: 30 million, counted in2004
Magnavox Odyssey: 2 million
Intellivision: 3 million
Atari 5200 sales: reportedly in excess over 1 million
Arcadia 2001 sales: ultimately in excess over 2 million

There were no sources that I could find about Fairchild Channel F, Vectrex, Bally Astrocade and Sega SG-1000 sales, so it could be said that the numbers were indefinite and not particularly high. But even if we'd estimate that about 1 million were sold of each console, and heighten the excess number to one million over the excess standard, the aggregate sales of second generation consoles (first generation is such a loose term that I think no solid numbers exist except for the Pong home version, which sold about 150000 copies total) is around 44 million, which is two-thirds of the NES's sales total. That's not including all the consoles that competed with the NES in the console war. If you can come with numbers that say otherwise, I think it's safe to say the NES was in itself most popular console at its time. Add to the fact that for 20 years, Super Mario Bros. remained the highest-selling game of all time (40.24 million copies sold, not counting VC and GBA sales), and you can't deny how huge NES was.

Wikipedia was used as a reference for most of the sales, and I believe it to be accurate. If it isn't, the difference can only be about (+ or -) 1 million.

Vandalvideo

I think you already know that Nintendo made enormous profits from the NES, which in turn spurred it on in the gaming field. Compare that to Atari, which suffered quite a loss because of the 5200, and the relative unknown status of BA, Vectrex and FCF sales as a whole. Are you saying the NES wasn't more prosperous? Other companies had to fight tooth and claw just to survive against the NES. Atari (the biggest component in the second generation) isn't even on the console market anymore, but Nintendo is. What does that suggest?

I think you already know that Nintendo made enormous profits from the NES, which in turn spurred it on in the gaming field. Compare that to Atari, which suffered quite a loss because of the 5200, and the relative unknown status of BA, Vectrex and FCF sales as a whole. Are you saying the NES wasn't more prosperous? Other companies had to fight tooth and claw just to survive against the NES. Atari (the biggest component in the second generation) isn't even on the console market anymore, but Nintendo is. What does that suggest?calvinsora

This is the 50th post on why PC gaming is cheaper. It still cost more than a console.mtron32

In the long run, no, PC gaming is not more expensive than console gaming.

These reasons why PC gaming is not much more expensive than consoles:

-Huge stem deals include: bioshock5$, mass effect5$, stalker2$, gta 4 8.50$ and newer games for like 37.00$ and pc games are 10$ cheaper. Meaning PC gaming is about 12$ less per game. If you get 7-10 games a year thats about 100$ on games your saving a year meaning after 6 years thats 600$.

-PC gaming doesent require a TV.

-Your going to need a new PC eventally.

-No online fees, or batteries needed(unless you want a gamepad to support it)

-A mid-end PC doesn't only give you a good gaming platform but also a good fast computer. And with so many other features besides gaming you should expect to pay more.

- You need is a 600$ PC to get good gaming, not spend thousands like some think.

-Free mods are offered on PC gaming platform.

The other think I would like to point out is that you CAN connect your PC to TV and use a gamepad.