Yet another PC vs Console price thread *spawn

[-tkf-]

Then you have to add the cost of a 360/ps3 to the console side for backward compatibility, otherwise you are removing a feature that the pc has which at least some pc owners use.

it's the pc that tries to be a console, not the other way around.

You will need a wireless console controller, a valid Windows 7 license, a Blu-ray drive and software for that. Then you can start buying your cheap hardware which matches the specs, remember blue tooth support and wireless network.
When everything is done, get a price on building and installing it.

I am not even asking for a small silent acceptable htpc cabinet.

 

[-tkf-]

You are right, I still don't get it. How can you possibly argue the value of something in a comparison by ignoring all the things it can't do that the comparing device can? What's the point of such an artificially limited comparison? Whatever, no point in wasting anymore time, I'll never understand this line of thinking. We may as well argue how a flip phone from the 90s is a better value than an iPhone because it's screen is protected, and conveniently ignore everything else an iPhone can do as "unimportant". Pointless.

The idea that Digital Foundry has presented with their first article on the subject was that with a PC you can get the same at comparable price. They focused on the same we do around here, performance.

It was never a PC vs a Console as game platform debate or comparison. Imho the PC is getting beat up in that comparison, because THEN we start to add games in to the comparison. And it's pretty much the golden rule that EVERY AAAA PC title with a Gazillion dollars budget WILL see a Console release, hence the comparisons. Save for World of Warcraft and other useless MMO's. However, it is NOT the same way when it comes to Console exclusives. Lets see the comparison on the PC release of RDR, every Halo titles, Forza, Gran Turismo etc.. It's a bloodbath, they didn't even show up..

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The previous thread spawned from a DF article about the price of PC gaming was closed so I've spawned another thread rather than add to it. Outcome will be the same. Same arguments, same misunderstandings, same cycle, closure predicted in a day or two.

 

[-tkf-]

At newegg.com, the cheapest I could build a system with a 750 Ti would be over $670.

-FX-6300 - $119.99
-Gigabyte GA-78LMT-S2 - $47.99
-MSI 750 Ti - $149.99 after rebate ($10 rebate)
-Cheap Gigabyte case - $23.99
-Corsair CX430 - $39.99 after rebate ($20 rebate)
-Kingston 2x4GB DDR3 1600 - $64.99
-WD Blue 1TB - $59.99
-LG BD-ROM - $49.99
-Windows 7 64-bit OEM - $99.99
-Logitech MK120 kb/m - $19.99

I could have went a bit cheaper with the motherboard, RAM and maybe the PSU, but I'd rather stick with decent brand names. Can probably shave some dollars off by shopping elsewhere, but it would still be significantly more expensive than a PS4.

Here in Canada, again at newegg.ca, a similar build would be ~$760.

You lack a Wireless 360 controller.. $60
There is no Wireless network in that build ($10) and BluTooth is also missing another $10
And you would have to make sure that there is a proper software included for movie playback on the BR-Drive.

Then you have to add the price for building the PC and installing the software/os.

EDIT: Look a spawn!

 

[HTupolev]

The idea that Digital Foundry has presented with their first article on the subject was that with a PC you can get the same at comparable price. They focused on the same we do around here, performance.

It was never a PC vs a Console as game platform debate or comparison. Imho the PC is getting beat up in that comparison, because THEN we start to add games in to the comparison. And it's pretty much the golden rule that EVERY AAAA PC title with a Gazillion dollars budget WILL see a Console release, hence the comparisons. Save for World of Warcraft and other useless MMO's. However, it is NOT the same way when it comes to Console exclusives. Lets see the comparison on the PC release of RDR, every Halo titles, Forza, Gran Turismo etc.. It's a bloodbath, they didn't even show up..

Heh, I would have loved to see a DigitalFoundry comparison of the original Xbox release of Halo 1 with the PC release. Would have been nuts, because Gearbox's port is pretty sloppy. Obviously these days even the cheapo DF PC is going to roll over an original Xbox to some astronomical extent, but a ton of visual effects and artwork just plain didn't survive the journey onto the PC version unscathed.

Hehe, that would have been a neat thing for them to have done when CE Anniversary released. If DF decided to be especially brutal they could have had fun ripping Classic Mode apart for being Silent Hill HD-tier garbage.

 

[KKRT]

I'm not trying to achieve feature parity with a PC, I'm doing the opposite... I'm pricing out a PC that achieves feature parity with the PS4. Not only is a BD-ROM needed for BD playback, but not every gamer wants a digital only gaming machine, therefore, a BD-ROM is needed (or at least a DVD-ROM).

So You're making just theoretical comparison where You asume that user will use all PS4 features, but will never use PC feature, ok.
You are also assuming the whole price aspect around US pricing, which is also ok, its big part of gaming world after all.
But this still is theoretical only comparison, which in reality would never happen in exactly this manner, but yeah with those assumptions PS4 is great value currently.

Ps. Check DF article about CU scaling and clock frequency scaling in games

-----------

The idea that Digital Foundry has presented with their first article on the subject was that with a PC you can get the same at comparable price. They focused on the same we do around here, performance.

The point of the article wasnt getting similar specs as PS4, it was about getting stable 1080p60 gaming machine for reasonable cost. And making average PC platform from 2014 for next-gen article testing.

It was never a PC vs a Console as game platform debate or comparison. Imho the PC is getting beat up in that comparison, because THEN we start to add games in to the comparison. And it's pretty much the golden rule that EVERY AAAA PC title with a Gazillion dollars budget WILL see a Console release, hence the comparisons. Save for World of Warcraft and other useless MMO's. However, it is NOT the same way when it comes to Console exclusives. Lets see the comparison on the PC release of RDR, every Halo titles, Forza, Gran Turismo etc.. It's a bloodbath, they didn't even show up..

I'm sorry, but this part is bullshit and You know that. You cant ignore hundreds PC exclusives, which have the biggest genre diversity in industry btw, just by calling it "World of Warcraft and other useless MMO's".
Sure, PC platform do not have platform holder that will buy out studio and pump 30m$ into the game just to promote their machine, but instead You get games that are focused on gameplay, not cinematic aspects. PC games do not spend 10m$ on cutscenes, they spend it on gameplay. You can prefer whatever You want, but ignoring those games is low level trolling, which does not fit this board in my opinion.

 

[-tkf-]

So You're making just theoretical comparison where You asume that user will use all PS4 features, but will never use PC feature, ok.
You are also assuming the whole price aspect around US pricing, which is also ok, its big part of gaming world after all.
But this still is theoretical only comparison, which in reality would never happen in exactly this manner, but yeah with those assumptions PS4 is great value currently.

Ps. Check DF article about CU scaling and clock frequency scaling in games

-----------

The point of the article wasnt getting similar specs as PS4, it was about getting stable 1080p60 gaming machine for reasonable cost. And making average PC platform from 2014 for next-gen article testing.

I'm sorry, but this part is bullshit and You know that. You cant ignore hundreds PC exclusives, which have the biggest genre diversity in industry btw, just by calling it "World of Warcraft and other useless MMO's".
Sure, PC platform do not have platform holder that will buy out studio and pump 30m$ into the game just to promote their machine, but instead You get games that are focused on gameplay, not cinematic aspects. PC games do not spend 10m$ on cutscenes, they spend it on gameplay. You can prefer whatever You want, but ignoring those games is low level trolling, which does not fit this board in my opinion.

it's not bullshit, it's reality. If we have to compare it the other way you have to take into account the other pc factors, like the cost for a proper monitor. The eternal upgrade path, the lousy user experience with crap software, and constant driver and os patches..

And I am really not taking about the original article, this thread is another pc vs console spawn.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

it's not bullshit, it's reality. If we have to compare it the other way you have to take into account the other pc factors, like the cost for a proper monitor. The eternal upgrade path, the lousy user experience with crap software, and constant driver and os patches..

And I am really not taking about the original article, this thread is another pc vs console spawn.

We should try to stick to the original article, which was PC's providing a 1080p60 experience that the consoles can't match. But I doubt the discussion will stay there. We've already seen Joker bring in the usual BC argument*. The same arguments are going to come up again and again as people with established opinions are just going to regurgitate them, rather than explore them with a view to changing.

* For PS4 to match a PC with BC, you'd need to buy a PS3. But you'd only want PS3 BC if you have a PS3 library, and if that's the case, buying a PC won't provide BC any more than buying a PS4 will. Likewise, buying a PC with its BC isn't going to do you any favours if your PC game library is zero. The only advantage PC has there is a massive back-catalogue of games enabled by full BC, which really comes under the library and cost of games rather than BC argument. A feature-for-feature argument between platforms is never fairly presented by either side. eg. You don't need a proper PC monitor to play 1080p60 games as per the article, and you don't have to upgrade once you've bought the hardware to get a console-like experience. You've assumed running a PC has to involve the standard practice of existing PC gamers and failed to appreciate how there are options and the PC experience can get closer to the console experience than that (though of course not identical).

 

[-tkf-]

and you don't have to upgrade once you've bought the hardware to get a console-like experience.

Stick to the original article OK.

You will need to upgrade as the new consoles get tapped for power, imho the current state of mp games is not going to be static, as the nuts and bolts are learned the pc port will require better hardware. Sure it may not be more expensive but the original hardware you bought is unlikely to keep up for years.

If you have a ps3 library you already have a ps3 same argument that was used in other bc arguments. Holds true here, unlike the pc there isn't os issues and driver issues to fight against.

 

[KKRT]

it's not bullshit, it's reality. If we have to compare it the other way you have to take into account the other pc factors, like the cost for a proper monitor. The eternal upgrade path, the lousy user experience with crap software, and constant driver and os patches..

And I am really not taking about the original article, this thread is another pc vs console spawn.

I have 720p TV that i bought with my PS3, now what?

Lousy user experience? Customization makes experience much better for me.
Constant driver and os patches? I update drivers once every two years, i dont even remember when i patched my OS.
Eternal upgrade path? I bought PC almost 2.5 years ago and the only thing i need to upgrade is GPU [GTX 560 currently] if i want to get into 1080p60 gaming.

And i talked about Your 'exclusive games argument' and You brought up drivers, user experience and buying monitors in return ...

 

[specwarGP2]

I'm sorry, but this part is bullshit and You know that. You cant ignore hundreds PC exclusives, which have the biggest genre diversity in industry btw, just by calling it "World of Warcraft and other useless MMO's".
Sure, PC platform do not have platform holder that will buy out studio and pump 30m$ into the game just to promote their machine, but instead You get games that are focused on gameplay, not cinematic aspects. PC games do not spend 10m$ on cutscenes, they spend it on gameplay. You can prefer whatever You want, but ignoring those games is low level trolling, which does not fit this board in my opinion.

Let's be honest though.. most of these exclusives are games we'd never buy unless they're on sale for 70% off on steam and never play anyways....

 

[RobertR1]

I like PC gaming for more complex games and those that generally have a large customization community.

Dragon Age, Skyrim, dota and even battlefield series come to mind.

Frankly for me PC gaming is best enjoyed when it's visuals are maxed out. That to me is a huge advantage of PC gaming. Sure you have to a premium but it's worth it. 1600p at 60fps on BF4 with everything maxed out for multiplayer is unquestionably awesome. As are all the Skyrim mods.

Comparing PC builds with consoles as new consoles comes out doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The PC part manufactures are there to make a profit and build in margin where the console manufacturer is often subsidizing even on their already high volume wholesale pricing. Why is this difficult to understand each console cycle?

 

[KKRT]

Let's be honest though.. most of these exclusives are games we'd never buy unless they're on sale for 70% off on steam and never play anyways....

Thats not accurate for me. Actually i could describe most PS3 exclusives i bought past gen this way, except for a full price, not 70% off. I bought them, finished once, maybe play MP for a few hours and never come back.
Gran Turismo, Tekken and Wipeout are exceptions.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Then you have to add the price for building the PC and installing the software/os.

You forgot to include the cost of petrol you put in the car to go to the store to pick up the parts, plus of course the cost of the car itself, and the cost of that new suit you bought for the job interview that you ultimately landed which allowed you to pay for the car.

 

[-tkf-]

You forgot to include the cost of petrol you put in the car to go to the store to pick up the parts, plus of course the cost of the car itself, and the cost of that new suit you bought for the job interview that you ultimately landed which allowed you to pay for the car.

Same price for console or pc. Just because I point out the obvious flaws with pc/console price comparing you have to reach for the lowest shelf?

 

[DrJay24]

As an old time PC games, PC gaming is a huge pain in the ass. It is not mainstream and has a while to go to get there. The console is a much better solution for most people regardless of the price.

 

[-tkf-]

And i talked about Your 'exclusive games argument' and You brought up drivers, user experience and buying monitors in return ...

Nah, i just don't think your argument is very valid, imho and frankly in the real world, the big money for the big games, that millions play aren't invested in the PC. You can be upset, angry and depressed, but that is how the world is. I have gamer laptop, 2 gamer desktops and a HTPC. I have been playing on the PC longer than most, it's my preferred platform for most games. But it's just not the platform with the best games (imho), you have a ton games, more than a normal life has time to play. But when it comes to the games that people want to play and spend time and money on it's not doing very good.

Thats not accurate for me.

IS the problem here, you and how you think it should be is classic for PC gamers, but that is not how it is..
How did BF4* do, that is a strong PC title, it plays the best on the PC, it's a showcase for the PC.. did it outsell the consoles?

*I bought it on the PC and the Premium package

 

[dobwal]

As an old time PC games, PC gaming is a huge pain in the ass. It is not mainstream and has a while to go to get there. The console is a much better solution for most people regardless of the price.

I wouldn't call it a huge pain in the ass. But it is for more sophisticated gamers who are invested enough to deal with a more hands on gaming enviroment.

If you a PC gamer who builds and upgrades your gaming PC, you don't need a gaming site or a forum to do a cost comparison for you. And if you are a PC gaming noob interested in moving from console to a PC, a cost comparison is just the tip of the iceberg and does very little to educate you on the difference.

Which is why I have a big problem with cost comparisons between consoles and PCs. They end up being discussions on a very small and insignificant part of what it means to go from a console to a PC.

If someone ask me if they could build a gaming PC for the same price as a console. The answer would be "yes" with 99% of the discussion entailing the major differences between the two platforms. There is no greater disservice to PC gaming when you encourage people to transition without acting as or providing the resources to help them navigate that transition as seamlessly as possible.

A cost comparison does nothing in my opinion because entry for a beginner shouldn't be building a gaming rig from the ground up. That's really ludicrous because it's impractical.

 

[pjbliverpool]

Same price for console or pc. Just because I point out the obvious flaws with pc/console price comparing you have to reach for the lowest shelf?

There are flaws in your arguments too.

You lack a Wireless 360 controller.. $60
There is no Wireless network in that build ($10) and BluTooth is also missing another $10
And you would have to make sure that there is a proper software included for movie playback on the BR-Drive.

Blu-Ray Dirve 12x: $50
X360 Wireless Gamepad: $40
WiFi Dongle: $5.30
Bluetooth Dongle: $3.80

All from Newegg - If you want blu-ray playback then yes you'll have to buy software separatly or find a deal from another site that sells them together, I don't know US websites but I found this one in the UK for £60:

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/lg-c...r-16x-dvdr-8x-dvd-r-dl-8x-plusrw-6x-rw-retail

Of course the above drive and software can both burn DVD's and play 3D blu-rays so you'll need to add the cost of a separate standalone unit to your console cost to achieve feature parity right?

Then you have to add the price for building the PC and installing the software/os.

Most people who would consider building a system like this from scratch would of course be capable of doing it themselves or at least know someone who would do it for them for free. How else would they have come up with the component list in the first place?

If you're going to start adding in petty things like this then we could also start talking about the shipping cost of your new console, or the online subscription costs/cost of games etc... but we really don't want the discussion to de-generate any further than it already has. Best to stick to sensible inclusions or don't contribute at all.

you have to take into account the other pc factors, like the cost for a proper monitor

Did you include the cost of a TV with your console?

You will need to upgrade as the new consoles get tapped for power, imho the current state of mp games is not going to be static, as the nuts and bolts are learned the pc port will require better hardware. Sure it may not be more expensive but the original hardware you bought is unlikely to keep up for years.

What evidence do you have that this PC with double the CPU power and about 40% more GPU power will be unable to match consoles in future titles? The PC has the same CPU and GPU feature set as the consoles, the same number of available CPU cores (which are all over twice as fast as their console counterparts) and at least in relation to the XB1 it sounds like it will soon even be running the same API which will me much lower level than any seen before on the PC.

Lets see the comparison on the PC release of RDR, every Halo titles, Forza, Gran Turismo etc.. It's a bloodbath, they didn't even show up..

Okay, so since you quoted exclusives from 2 consoles there your hardware cost just jumped up from $400 to $900. Ouch, not so cheap any more is it?

My point here is to illustrate that whichever console you choose, you still miss out on exclusives. Even if you own both the PS4 and XB1 you're still missing out on WiiU exclusives. Are you losing sleep over that? Or are you content to play the dozens of great games available already for your consoles? The same applies to PC gamers expect we have a back catalog of thousands to choose from. Missing out on half a dozen AAA exclusives over the course of half a decade is hardly something to worry about when you have hundreds of AAA games already available to you.

the lousy user experience with crap software, and constant driver and os patches...
unlike the pc there isn't os issues and driver issues to fight against.

Maybe we should just stick to things that can be discussed objectively and that are, you know... true.

If you have a ps3 library you already have a ps3 same argument that was used in other bc arguments.

So you're saying we're now allowed to include hardware that was purchased during the previous consoles generation in this comparison? Awesome! Then for many the PC will be completely free (like mine) considering it was bought before the new consoles launched.

For many more it will be far cheaper than the new consoles since all that will be required is a GPU upgrade.

Either that or we assume a clean slate and thus no PS4 backwards compatibility and no way to play last generation games.

 

[joker454]

We've already seen Joker bring in the usual BC argument*.

That's because no one has yet explained to me why on the 14th of November 2013 there was interest in games like Bioshock Infinite, etc, but somehow the next day on the 15th all previous games disappeared into the ether, no longer exist and are of no interest to anyone on the planet. Sorry I don't buy it at all. I can't possibly be the only gamer in existence that is currently interested in and/or playing games not available for purchase on the new machines, let alone playing stuff like Mame, indie games, smaller budget games, etc. I'll forever argue that it's a flawed argument to ignore 30+ years of games and hence why these pc/console comparisons are not representative of reality.