Uh, have you seen any benchmarks? Mantle is pushing AMD's hardware over Nvidia's in some games, hardware that was already significantly cheaper than Nvidia's.
I like Mantle because it's what developers want. It alleviates some of the limitations of APIs like DirectX and is especially a benefit to me because I have a good GPU with a fast, but older CPU (Core 2 Quad). I really don't need more CPU performance in everyday activities, but Mantle helps unburden my CPU in games. I hope developer support continues and we can see games designed with Mantle from the ground up.
1. It came out a year too early. I'm not pining for a new console at the moment, and this is after the Wii U has been out for a year already. Most people who were thinking about buying a new console were waiting for the new MS/Sony boxes, anyway.
2. It's a bit underpowered. Had they waited that extra year, this would be much less a problem.
3. It's been $50 overpriced from the start.
4. The name is terrible. From the day they announced it, I said that consumers would confuse it for some kind of Wii product.
5. Marketing, in typical Nintendo fashion, has also been terrible.
6. Lack of third-party support. At least some of the other ones have to do with this one.
I would love to see what Tom Kalinske would do, if he were to come in and right the ship. I think with a price cut and the right marketing campaign, the Wii U could easily be turned around.
1. The HMZ is not Sony's version of the Rift (and by the way, they've been selling HMZ headsets for years now).
2. The HMZ has absolutely nothing to do with the PS4. I'm sure it works with the PS4, because it probably works with anything that outputs via HDMI. But it wasn't designed for gaming, at all.
LOL, look at the video examples of the head tracking latency between the two. The Rift is practically latency-free, fluid, while the Sony headset isn't even close.
I'm not trying to slag Sony's product, I'm just saying that the market for these two devices is completely different. Oculus is going for a "VR" experience; Sony is providing a large personal viewing screen. Rift is for gamers, HMZ is for videophiles. Comparing the two is silly.
That's a joke. You can build a Micro-ATX mini-tower that takes up little space and doesn't look "ugly." It also saves you a bit of cash.
"you can steal your games more easily"
That's a selling point? If you don't know how to build a PC, you probably don't know how to pirate games. By the way, last time I checked, there was a shitload of pirated console games available. Oh yeah, that's because it's easy to pirate console games.
"the graphics are better, the games are cheaper. They are not enough for me to buy a PC and they never have been."
There are more PC games available than console games. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. If you like Sony exclusives, you get a Sony console. If you like MS exclusives, an MS console. If you like everything, or if you like simulations and/or any other category which exists only on PC, then you get a PC. Obviously the plethora of titles available on PC does not interest you. Or you are ignorant. That's also a possibility. In either case, you'll have to continue spending more money on games than I do.
"It seems if you want to convince me you need to show me something else that PC has that I might want"
Simulations? Point-and-click adventures? Indie titles? The list of titles that AREN'T on PC is much smaller than the list of titles that ARE on PC but aren't on consoles. So it all depends on whether you care more about console exclusives or PC exclusives. PC certainly has quantity on its side.
"It is at the point with me where I feel even if I built an awesome PC, I wouldn't be any happier with gaming than I was before."
That's absolutely fine. You're not itching for anything the PC has to offer, so naturally you don't need a PC for gaming. Great, stick with a console, and I think nothing less of you (in fact, I respect you for admitting that you get what you want out of a console). But don't act like the only reason people game on PCs is to have the best graphics or to pirate games. That's not the case at all. I game more on the PC now simply because it's WAY easier to buy games on Steam than it is to go to a store and buy a game, and it's way cheaper as well. If it weren't for Steam, I probably wouldn't have bought any games in the last six months, but instead, I've bought about 60 of them!
"You can upgrade a PC for $600 or less sure but how far does that take you?"
Reading failure. I said you can build an ENTIRE NEW PC for $600 or less. Upgrading your current PC will cost significantly less. And will last you at least 3 or 4 years.
"I'd need a better monitor for that as well, mine doesn't even have a HDMI port."
Unless you're looking to upgrade the resolution of your monitor, any modern graphics card will work with your current one. The ones that are DVI only will include a VGA adapter. And will also include an HDMI port which, by the way, PLUGS INTO YOUR CURRENT HDTV. So don't act like you need to buy something to use modern PC hardware.
"I'd need to scower the internet searching for components, then I'd order them all, they would arrive, I'd probably get them here and then I'd have to piss around replacing everything, which is everything from the motherboard to the power supply for me."
You could *scour* ("scower" is not a word, as I'm sure your browser's spellcheck already attempted to tell you) the internet, or you could simply go to newegg. Yeah, you might need to replace "everything," in which case you have a really old computer, like I said previously. Now, I know there are a bunch of people out there using ancient computers, I just don't understand why they insist on continuing to use them. Why do you insist on using an outdated computer? I just don't get it.
"Then I'd need to find some way of getting Windows back onto it. If I buy new, that is another £100 if not more."
A Windows 7 license is $99. I don't know what that is in £, but chances are you can probably use your old license anyway.
"Then I'd need to actually buy some games which granted on Steam is pretty cheap but even so adding to the cost again."
No. You don't get to act like cheap games are an additional cost on top of the price of basic console gaming.
For comparison, I spent about $280 on games during the 4-week winter Steam sale. I got about 40 games. So each of my games cost roughly $7 apiece. The cheapest I usually see console games selling for is $19.99. Maybe if I buy a bunch of used games, I can get them for $10. I still have to actually drive to the store to buy them. With Steam, I can buy and install them right from my couch. So the price of games doesn't even factor in the convenience.
There's absolutely no way you can compare the price and convenience of Steam to console gaming. And I haven't even bothered to mention that my PC plays games that were released 10+ years ago. Your console doesn't do that.
"Before you are done you are $600 (if you know what you are doing) and you get medium graphics out."
If you know what you're doing, you're paying a little more than $600 and getting hardware that is a good 80% of what the top-end, $2000+ hardware will get you. Your best bang-for-the-buck is always in the $150-250 range when it comes to a GPU. You're not getting "medium graphics," you're getting graphics that a console couldn't dream of, just not top-end PC graphics.
"And you had to build it yourself
You were afforded the ability to choose your own hardware, and nothing that you didn't want...
"...and there is always a chance with PC games that you will have to spend time troubleshooting them and messing around with the graphics settings to make it run properly before you even start."
You get to choose which compromises to make in order to get the framerate you desire. Don't get me wrong, I get it: some people don't want to mess with graphics settings. For you, yeah, maybe a dumbed-down console is best. For me, I like being able to change graphical settings, max it out and take a slight framerate hit or turn down a couple options to get it butter smooth. I LOVE being able to control the tradeoffs in order to get what I want instead of being beholden by hardware. 1 minute of changing settings is well worth it to me.
"no earthing your hands so you don't **** up your components due to static"
You have to be a real dumbass to **** something up due to static. I say this as someone who works around open computers every day.
"Why do PC gamers play games? So they have an excuse to upgrade their computer?"
Huh? I play games because I like to play games! I have a ton of consoles that I've accumulated over the years. I mostly play on the PC because it's the most convenient (only one box connected to the TV for all my old games) and it gives me the best graphics on all the newer games. I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
"I hate Crysis 1,2 and 3."
I agree. Crysis doesn't appeal to me at all. Keep in mind there's about a billion other games on the PC platform. Plenty of PC exclusives don't place graphics as the sole priority.
PC also supports more control options than any other console ever, including high quality interfaces like the Fanatec wheels and super-specialized flight sim controllers. If you think that PC gaming is all about chasing pretty graphics, then obviously you're no PC gamer.
I don't understand your argument. Your PC isn't fast enough to run modern games? You can build a brand new PC that will handle current games nicely for $600 or less. If your computer is 5 years old or newer, you'll likely be able to upgrade it for even less. If your PC is more than 5 years old, then you have an old computer and probably shouldn't expect too much out of it (nor should you be putting more money into it).
I built my computer over 6 years ago. It ran current games at lower settings just fine, but I upgraded the CPU for $100 and the graphics card for $150. I can run most new games at 60+ FPS at 1080p (and they look better than any console). I did spend about $1000 to build the computer, but that was 6 years ago. So figure $1250 for two console generations, versus $900 for an Xbox 360 and Xbox One, or $1000 for a PS3 and PS4. But I get to choose my parts, when I upgrade, and how fast it is. It's worth it to me. And hardware prices have come down, so now it's more like $1000 for two console generations (you don't need to spend $1000 to build a good gaming computer).
rarson's comments