You're making up your own rules here. SW already has rules. PC is one system, not whatever fantasy talk you're doing.

Maybe post at another site?

Factually speaking, PC has more sales and high scoring games than xbone or ps4.

That is not apples and oranges. Just because console doesn't certain excel at genres doesn't mean we can't compare PC and XBOX, PS4, OR WiiU: you literally just made that up on the spot. IF someone IRL asked you which system had more gaming software sales and aaa-aa scoring titles, XboxOne or PC, what would your answer be? Would you lie to him like you lie here? Would you really tell him "but you have to combine all consoles first"? No...no one would do that, the person would think you are an absolute tard and ask why you are bringing 2 other systems into the debate.

People usually compare 1v1 here at SW, and if its 3v1 (like you do) it is pointed out and noted as such, It's not like your little revolution is catching on Cranler. Sorry.

Deal with SW rules, and common sense.

P.S> I'm honored that people pretty much have been reduced to beg and plead to use 3vs1 against PC in order to even come close to it. God damn, now that's a titan of a system.

You aren't even trying to make a point, but arguing and dodging for the sake of it. I'm done.

His argument actually doesn't matter going by these forum rules. It isn't how SW operates. Moderators of this forum have banned him for this topic in the past. PC counts as 1 system, as do each consoles.

He's just blowing hot air.

The fact of the matter is, you can go to Metacritic and see how many aaa-aa the PC SYSTEM had for a single year, you can do the same for each separate console. After you are done you're not going to automatically combine the 3 console figures against PC. No one does that.

You know this entire arguement started once Cranler found out each console was behind PC in just about every statistic, so he had to start combining consoles. The sad part is he's still behind after combining them.

First of all, Star Citizen and other games - which I'm excited for since they could be Oculus Rift-enabled some day - still represent the exceptions and anomalies (and crowd-funding is a terrific way to raise money but not reliable for every game. I have a list of great products that failed to meet their goals and never surfaced due to crowd-funding limitations). But my real question is: will we see more AAA output, bigger and better production values and more revenue coming in for publishers, if consoles were brutally excised from the platform equation tomorrow? That's my point blank question, in response to the controversial, crazy belief that consoles are holding everything back, standing in PC's way, ruining everything and are a complete waste of time/money/space.

I'm asking this point blank quesiton so people will learn to finish their plates. If they make a bold statement, I need them to thoroughly convince me that their alternate plan and well-structured future scenario (and ability to work through a problem) is better than what we have. They're asking us to take steps but give no roadmap. And so far, I see no plausible answers, or anything past an adolescent line or two. I suspect they're speaking less from a sensible, sincere place, and more from a juvenile, knee-jerk reaction at seeing consoles getting any media attention and topping sales charts. Nothing is stopping PC from topping the charts too. Worry about that rather than the competition doing its own thing.

Also, I'm not denying Steam is growing. If anything, the PC game sales of popular AAA games should be far better to reflect that, if anything. But they aren't shooting up that dramatically nor handily beating PS4, X1 or PS360 sales every month, despite having the larger install base. I don't even need to check which version of Alien Isolation or CoD:AW will sell the most. PC gamers and consoles gamers know the answer.

And I like the idea of Steam Machines and similar products that are about to come out. I'm not anti-PC or saying no one moves their PC tower or AlienWare box around the house. I'm calling out some users who are making really brash statements about the industry and consoles and where it needs to go, but then supply no information and don't even have a sketchy treatise ready when I asked for it. For all the critical talk and PC Extremist invasion of every Youtube comment section on the web, they suddenly clam up when asked for better solutions to simple questions. If their answer is "make PS4/X1 as powerful as 780ti; get 60fps now and I happy" - wow, this is what I'm working with.

Who cares, BigBOI. Your name sounds like a 2003 Xbox Live GameTag where you couldn't think of anything at the registration screen. It was probably that or Chronic420 or NWO4L1fe.

I like how I wrote all of that stuff earlier about the industry and console gaming, and that is your only "question" and response.

Waste of time discussing things on SW sometimes.

Serious talking is an endangered species on SW.

That's not exactly how we should look at it. We take PC as an inclusive platform because all players play together. There is no independant Mac or Linus server. And the developement process and costs are nowhere near what they are for the different architectures between consoles. Moreover, the market share isn't nearly the same. If you want to isolate Windows-based PC gaming you can suit yourself all day, as the numbers won't change all that much,

The "console that released a year ago" is a fallacious argument. We don't compare 30 years of PC gaming to this year of consoles. We compare year to year revenu. Date of release is of no consequence in that statistic. And the heart of the matter is that PC (particularly mobile, true, but pure PC as well) as been growing at an incredible rate. I understand that one can feel like excluding mobile, and I would like to see stats without it myself, but it is still gaming that, while casual, is mostly only possible on PC thanks to the flexibility of the patform. Like a mom owning a Wii to play wii-fit once a week is part of console statistics.

As for cost. A $1200 gaming PC will often actually save you money over the course of a generation. As for annual upgrades, it is propaganda only hard-headed fanbois want to believe in. A well built $1200 PC will last you 5 years easy, and will save you enough money in that time for a whole new system, though all you could need, if that time, after that is a new card for about $250. You are mistaken if you think console is the less expensive option. As an example, my Jan. 2011 $1100 build still runs anything I throw at it on med-high to Ultra and I don't expect to upgrade anything in it for a good 2 years at least. I have played well over 200 games on it in that time, for thousands of hours. My 7 years old PS3 has cost me about 1k in the time I have owned it. I have 7 games. It is not even comparable.

Nope, we are talking systems. PC is one system.

For example,

If someone asked you how many AAA-AA are on each SYSTEM. You'd name the ones on PC, XBONE, PS4, and WIIU. One for each 4 current gen system. You wouldn't just name them on PC and then make one huge Console list. No one does that.

If someone asked you which one system has the most gaming software revenue in order, the first answer would be PC. Second place would be PS4 (example). Third place XBONE. Second place wouldn't directly go to "consoles", you'd be tricking the person who asked you about sales. The person asked which system, not systems plural.

A myth that mostly only NA still believes

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2014/04/28/as-global-pc-game-revenue-surpasses-consoles-how-long-should-console-makers-keep-fighting/

http://www.vg247.com/2014/07/12/pc-gaming-hardware-worth-double-console-gaming-market-value-report/.

Nope. PC is one. PS4 is one. WiiU is one. Each has their own games and sales.

EA has actually been taking a look at their QA lately. After they got a new CEO the Sim City debacle went down shortly followed by Battlefield 4.

Battlefield Hardline's huge delay, which means this is the first year without a holiday EA shooter for about 5 years, was a big indication that they are starting to look at their quality standards a lot more. Dragon Age Inquisition is evidence of this too. They realized that Dragon Age 2 was pushed too fast and despite decent sales and reviews, it left a bad taste in people's mouths. They probably gauged that by the DLC sales which were probably poor (just guessing but I have a good feeling about that).

Also they are somehow letting DICE do Mirror's Edge 2 despite the original game not selling within the standards of a big budget EA title.

Of course they aren't perfect. Their NBA series is still crap and the latest NHL game they released sucked. That may have a lot more to do with the EA Sports division is probably a completely separate branch of the company even with their own game engine.

Because you totally can't play with a controller and play from the couch on a big tv...while enjoying better visuals and framerates and cheaper games, with free online. It totally sucks!