Why PC gaming is dying-Crysis

[Neb]

Many of these arguments seem to revolve around "PC gaming is dying because I'm buying a console", or similar. "WoW is dying because I'm not playing it any more". That sort of thing. I guess it's only natural for folks to want to believe that their personal circumstances are where it's at.

Sadly it is like that for some...

Neverthelss I with my A64 3200+, 2GB ram and a 7900GT run pretty much all games ace (30-60fps) at full settings and 1280x1024 (Oblivion 1024x768). Multiplatform games run better and looks better (some by far due to mods) than any other platform version, and I consider my comp to be almost outdate or even...outdated! ...

Sadly some people are also stubborn enough to think that a game cannot be played unless you have all the settings maxed out in that particular game. Obviously there are settings that can adapt the graphics/gameplay to the users hardware to make the game run well. Not to forget what resoultion is used... and even lowering the detail settings it still may look much better than competition...

 

[Davros]

consider this :
console games retail for £10 more than pc games in the u.k
so over the years being a pc gamer has saved me over $20,000

 

[Neb]

consider this :
console games retail for £10 more than pc games in the u.k
so over the years being a pc gamer has saved me over $20,000

True, the console maunfacturers gain most through the royalty for games sold. Reason why the console games cost much more (~33% more). Otherwise the console itself would have cost quite a bit more and would people really buy a PS3/xbox360 for 800-1000$?

 

[pascal]

I have a Crisis here with my wife complaining about all the old/past hardware I have doing nothing

I will upgrade using the Home Theater PC as the main excuse to do that.
Also PS3 is a bluray player and there are around 40 Blu-Ray titles with portuguese subtitles

I need a book like "The Art of Upgrade".

 

[pjbliverpool]

I think his p0oint is that new PC games tend to need very high powered components to look good and run well.

I disagree. I believe its due to next gen consoles that some games over the last 18 months have needed high end rigs to play at high settings relative to the time of their release. fast forward to today and a modestly priced X1900XT will run pretty much everything at high or very close to high settings (i.e. next gen console equivilent) and I don;t think anyone can argue that doesn't constitute looking good.

Even an 8800GTS 320 is pretty cheap these days and will certainly run any game out well and looking great. At least by console standards which is the obvious standard to compare to given that the implication is that PC's are dying because of their price compared to consoles

I certainly believe he has a point there. Just look at Obliviion or Fear for example. Two gaes that were rightfully criticized to be total hogs at the time fo their release.

How do you define "looking good" in the context of FEARs release? i.e. FEAR released when the next best platform available was the original xbox. You certainly don't need to run FEAR at its highest settings to compete with xbox games and I remember it running fine on my 9800pro with just a few settigns turned down.

Today FEAR will run on practically anything.

There will be many many more oblivions and fears in the future too.

I don't believe there will. Now that we are past the hump of the top end hardware equaling next gen consoles, games for the next few years won't go much beyond console requirements. I expect an 8800GTS 320MB to last this full console generation producing console level graphics and performance (or greater). That may not be at high PC settings but if consoles are the yardstick of "par" graphics then nor will that 8800 be outputting "subpar" graphics even at lower settings and thus even though you may not be able to turn the graphics up to high, you have no alternative platform that will give you more aside from a PC upgrade. Hence it should be irrelevant to the success of the PC as a platform.

Thats not to say it is irrelevant however as there are plenty of people out there that assume because they can't turn the PC game up to "maximum" and the console game runs at "maximum" as standard, the console game must look better and therefore they are missing out and must switch to consoles.

 

[Davros]

"Even an 8800GTS 320 is pretty cheap"

I actually think its pretty expensive and considering many people think of it (or its ati equiv) as the minimum needed for dx10 games i think its going to set them back a bit hopefully the nextgen mid range cards will be an improvement on what we have now

 

[swaaye]

I think it's fascinating to read people write about how costly it is to game on a PC. It is actually cheaper than ever. CPUs, RAM, HDDs, 3D cards, etc are cheaper compared to 10 years ago. And you also used to have to add a sound card, ethernet, etc. Not anymore because those are built into the cheap mobos of today. Sure there are some super high end options, but those are just "luxury" items that you sure do not need to have a good time.

Notebooks are incredibly cheaper than ever before.

On the other hand, the consoles are more costly than ever. Unless we're talking about PS2, Xbox, and Cube. To say otherwise basically admits that you see consoles as offering the same experiences as PCs, which is only partly true.

 

[Obakan]

So, my PC, like anybody's past six months old, is now past dated for current PC gaming. Even though I upgraded to a 7600GT which is a decent card, I dunno, a year ago.

Anyway I have 1GB RAM, Athlon 64 3000+ (single core). Ah and Win Xp.

This system is fine for..websurfing which is really all I do with it. But I have a hankering to play Crysis.

Well, lets add it up:

Some sort of low end Core2Dou (possibly to be overclocked) ~$120
Motherboard~$100
2GB RAM~$100

This is actually not too bad for the base system, and this will benefit me a lot in just general use. Playing Hi-Def game trailers and whatnot. Still, $300 is a lot of money in the real world. We're always discussing how the consoles are too expensive for example, while an X360 is $349.
Now one of the kickers, I need Vista, and I need the $220 retail version to go fully legal, because it has unlimited activations needed for rebuilding my PC in the future.

Then we'll need a card. At the low end we'd be looking at ~$300 8800GTS 640. That'd be a minimum to experience Crysis "in full glory".

Probably also, definitly, need a new power supply, but I'll leave that off, assuming I could get one for $40. Could use a upgrade to my 4:3 17" LCD as well, but lets not add another $200 for that right now. Really would like to go whole hog and do 4GB RAM while I'm at it, it makes sense with prices so low. But I'll leave that off too.

So that's ~840, minimum... Maybe 1100 to go whole hog.

I'm really hankering to play Crysis, but, can I afford, nay better, justify, to drop nearly a grand on it? Probably not.

Change the Topic name, shall we?
PC-gaming is dying because you dont want to spend $1000 dollars to play Crysis on max settings with graphics that is only possible on PC?

Your computer is enough to run Crysis but not on high settings. Maybe you shouldn´t have bought a budget graphic card.

You get what you pay for. Hope that sentence explains the BOLD text (above) that you wrote.

 

[StefanS]

Off to a bad start and stayed there. Locked.