If geeks love it, we’re on it

Howdy, Stranger!

You found the friendliest gaming & tech geeks around. Say hello!

Forget the console and build a gaming PC! A value comparison

24

Comments

  • ledbetterledbetter Chattanooga, TN
    edited Aug 2009
    Birthday present, FREE! Victory for me! :wink:
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Not playing a crappy game - chalk up another victory for consumers in the value comparison.

    Street Fighter IV was $20 for consoles at Gamestop the other day - and still going for $40 on PC. WEIRD, you can find deals everywhere!
  • kryystkryyst Ontario, Canada
    edited Aug 2009
    This argument can't fairly include the cost of software, it's completely unpredictable. Launch title games off the shelf are basically the same price for PC's and Consoles. Any other way of purchasing software is totally messed up when trying to draw a comparison.

    Lets look at some of those other comparisons though for interest sake.

    PC's have Steam and other Digital Deliver Services.
    Consoles (all 3 currently) also have digital sales and Xbox 360 just introduced digital distribution for new games as well. Pricing in all those markets is comparable.

    Used PC game sales are now almost non-existent, however the used console game sales market is still increasing.

    PC's have freeware games or LimitedFree games, which is pretty much exclusive to the PC. You can get some demo's for consoles but they are much more limiting.

    Almost every PC game now requires some kind of license agreement or security software. Which singular purpose is preclude you from selling that game, installing it to many times or in other ways crippling what you can do with that game when your are done with it. This is the main death of the used PC sales. But it also hampers your ability to trade games with friends. Which is utter @!#@!@#. No other media - let me repeat - NO OTHER MEDIA. Has this restriction when you physically purchase something. In this respect Console gaming PWN's PC gaming. Grab a game bring it to your friends place and your good to go. Trade games with friends etc.... this gives significantly more value to the purchase of a Console game beyond it's initial cost.

    Rental Games. Consoles have them - PC's don't. $5 and you've got a game for a week, rent it 4 times if you want. Seriously this ability is a huge benefit to console gaming that is not available to PC's. It's probably the counterpoint to Shareware gaming or LimitedFree play.

    Last but not least Piracy. It's a wash. For consoles you have to mod your console, usually there is some nominal cost here in the $50-100 range. Once that's done though you download your game burn it to disk and your good to go. For PC's the process isn't much different. However the risk of getting viruses is increased. Also Pirated PC's games are far more finicky due to the various security counter measures employed. Pirated Console games are just more stable. Though with the Xbox360 you do have to be cautious about how they exist with your live account.

    My personal experience for acquiring games leads favorably towards Console gaming. I find it easier to get games, I feel better about how much I'm spending on the games I buy and my purchase value feel like it stretches further. YMMV.
  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ @TheButterflyman Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Just to make a semi-related side point here: Selling your games to a used games shop is technically against your EULA for 99% of all software, including console games. Places like GameStop have built a business around violating those rules. The only reason they exist is because the game publishers don't want to take their chances in court, since their EULA would likely then be deemed unconstitutional (due to a 1800s precedent that told book sellers that they are not allowed to stop people from reselling their books).
  • KoreishKoreish I'm a penguin, deal with it. KCMO Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Cliff I think my point has almost everything to do with your article. According to your article I could buy a gaming PC for just as much or a little over the cost of a console. If that's the case it really only comes down to what games I want to play, and how I want to play them (keyboard/mouse vs. controller).

    We shouldn't be arguing over a TV/Monitor issue. If I'm buying a console I need a TV if I'm buying a PC I'll need a monitor, in both cases I'm forking over extra money to play a game. Either way in an inch by inch comparison TVs are more expensive than monitors. To use Newegg as per Cliff's stipulation the cheapest 22" TV is 50USD more expensive than the cheapest 22" monitor and the TV had poor reviews while the monitor had excellent reviews.
  • Cliff_ForsterCliff_Forster Baltimore, MD Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    kryyst wrote:
    This argument can't fairly include the cost of software, it's completely unpredictable. Launch title games off the shelf are basically the same price for PC's and Consoles. Any other way of purchasing software is totally messed up when trying to draw a comparison.

    Lets look at some of those other comparisons though for interest sake.

    PC's have Steam and other Digital Deliver Services.
    Consoles (all 3 currently) also have digital sales and Xbox 360 just introduced digital distribution for new games as well. Pricing in all those markets is comparable.

    Used PC game sales are now almost non-existent, however the used console game sales market is still increasing.

    PC's have freeware games or LimitedFree games, which is pretty much exclusive to the PC. You can get some demo's for consoles but they are much more limiting.

    Almost every PC game now requires some kind of license agreement or security software. Which singular purpose is preclude you from selling that game, installing it to many times or in other ways crippling what you can do with that game when your are done with it. This is the main death of the used PC sales. But it also hampers your ability to trade games with friends. Which is utter @!#@!@#. No other media - let me repeat - NO OTHER MEDIA. Has this restriction when you physically purchase something. In this respect Console gaming PWN's PC gaming. Grab a game bring it to your friends place and your good to go. Trade games with friends etc.... this gives significantly more value to the purchase of a Console game beyond it's initial cost.

    Rental Games. Consoles have them - PC's don't. $5 and you've got a game for a week, rent it 4 times if you want. Seriously this ability is a huge benefit to console gaming that is not available to PC's. It's probably the counterpoint to Shareware gaming or LimitedFree play.

    Last but not least Piracy. It's a wash. For consoles you have to mod your console, usually there is some nominal cost here in the $50-100 range. Once that's done though you download your game burn it to disk and your good to go. For PC's the process isn't much different. However the risk of getting viruses is increased. Also Pirated PC's games are far more finicky due to the various security counter measures employed. Pirated Console games are just more stable. Though with the Xbox360 you do have to be cautious about how they exist with your live account.

    My personal experience for acquiring games leads favorably towards Console gaming. I find it easier to get games, I feel better about how much I'm spending on the games I buy and my purchase value feel like it stretches further. YMMV.

    kryyst,

    You raise some very compelling arguments. We can slice and dice the argument a number of ways and it will never be a one size fits all scenario. Rentals for a week at $7.99 may be a good value for some, I don't find that it is personally because most of the multi-player content I like, I want to play with some repetition. Also, the used argument is compelling, not a bad thing to point out, still, I have never considered selling back my content at a fraction of the value I paid a good value for the consumer, especially when you were dealing with an inflated margin to begin with. Still, I won't begrudge you the argument. A compelling analysis can be made using those points. Once again, Rule #1, I'm not looking to pick a direct fight about what platform everyone should prefer. I don't consider myself anti-console. Hopefully this analysis at least breaks the paradigm that PC gaming rigs require a 2nd mortgage. I think it at least accomplishes that much, even if some disagree with the methodology of the analysis, its still pretty amazing how far the cost of high quality gaming grade PC components have fallen in the last few years, especially in 2009. So, even if you could shape the numbers a bit to get console on the winning side of the equation, I think I am at least displaying how close the platforms are. I still hold that the PC offers a better value proposition over a couple years total cost of ownership, but even if you don't agree because you found some value in the console that was lost on me, we may at least agree that the two are significantly closer than you may have thought they were.

    Pointing back to the Don Clark WSJ piece. I am not very fond of the marketing developed to make people think that a real gaming rig starts at over two grand. Those days are long behind us, and people should know it so they can make the best informed decisions on how to spend their entertainment dollars.
  • kryystkryyst Ontario, Canada
    edited Aug 2009
    Yes, I'm not begrudging you the point that quality gaming on a PC is no longer cost prohibitive.

    I guess where the sticking point is for most of us is in the application of $ to the article, exclusions were made and comparisons were drawn without painting a full picture. You did cover one scenario. But there are others as well as other factors.

    I think perhaps another common situation that is perhaps more valid to address is one in which the person has an aging computer and is debating between upgrading it to play games or purchasing a console.

    I think very few people are at a place where they don't have a computer, don't have a console and are flipping flopping between which one to get.
  • ThraxThrax Professional Shill, Pokémaster, Watch Slut, Mumble Hivemind Drone Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Snarkasm has hit back with a counter-point which sells consoles as the better deal. Read it here: Sorry, PCs! Consoles are the better deal
  • UPSLynxUPSLynx Top EA shill, The Dean of Computer Graphics Redwood City, CA Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    I'm staying out of this one. But it's very fun to watch, keep at it guys, this is golden.

    But I must interject:
    Snarkasm wrote:
    Street Fighter IV was $20 for consoles at Gamestop the other day - and still going for $40 on PC. WEIRD, you can find deals everywhere!

    moot point. SF4 has been out on console for over 6 months, it was released on PC one month ago.

    Consider that SF4 was still retailing at $50 on consoles and the PC release was priced at $40.

    Sure you can find deals anywhere, that's store dependant though, and can't be made for an arguing point for price effectiveness of a platform. If that is the argument, the PC version is still cheaper, and it's still the normal for PC games to be priced cheaper.
  • shwaipshwaip bluffin' with my muffin Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    UPSLynx wrote:
    I'm staying out of this one. But it's very fun to watch, keep at it guys, this is golden.

    But I must interject:



    moot point. SF4 has been out on console for over 6 months, it was released on PC one month ago.

    Consider that SF4 was still retailing at $50 on consoles and the PC release was priced at $40.

    Sure you can find deals anywhere, that's store dependant though, and can't be made for an arguing point for price effectiveness of a platform. If that is the argument, the PC version is still cheaper, and it's still the normal for PC games to be priced cheaper.

    If I'm reading this right, you're saying that console games always come out sooner than PC games.

    (i kid).
  • UPSLynxUPSLynx Top EA shill, The Dean of Computer Graphics Redwood City, CA Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    I don't understand your troll.

    (I am sick, and on medication, thoughts are fuzzy, pay no attention to the tall guy with PC games)
  • DocFrazierDocFrazier Gladbrook, IA Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    With my PC, i have the freedom to do what i want, be it change to a different brand of GUP, Motherboard, etc. whenever i want, to upgrade as i please. I have the freedom to play just about any game ever made, INCLUDING console games. (Emus are great) The multiplayer capacity that exists on a PC system is vastly superior to a console because, if i don't like the douche bags i have to play with on a server, I can get my own server to control and dictate whatever i want.

    With a console, you make a one time investment, (the earlier, the more expencive) you get a non-upgradable unit, which in 3 years TOPs will be outdated and they'll be trying to sell me another one that might not even play the games i already have. so i'll have to buy a whole new unit, probably at an inflated cost compaired to my privious one. I'm limited to the proprietary content that is released for the game system, can't play x-box games on a playstation.

    anyway, the point of the article, was to show the decrease in the cost difference between PC and console in the last 6 years.
    Being a computer gamer since i was little(go commodore, woot!) i may be a little bias, but i do enjoy alot of the titles that consoles have to offer. But i sold my 360 to build my game rig because i have so much more versatility with a PC. Period. a console's range of function is nothing compaired to a PC. Computers Win, hands down in my book.
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    The article wasn't about comparing overall functionality, at least according to Cliff's first rule:
    Cliff wrote:
    The only mission here is to dispel the common misinformation that gaming on PC costs far more than gaming on console.

    Sure, you can do other things with a PC - but the article was about the gaming experience and the cost of such an experience on two platforms.
  • DocFrazierDocFrazier Gladbrook, IA Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    DocFrazier wrote:
    anyway, the point of the article, was to show the decrease in the cost difference between PC and console in the last 6 years.

    :) Functionality is just what wins the ongoing discussion that the article sparked, IMO. because functionality is a big part of my considerations when i buy something. how much am i going to use this item, and how much does it give back to me.
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    DocFrazier wrote:
    a console's range of function is nothing compaired to a PC. Computers Win, hands down in my book.

    I was just pointing out that your final statement had no place in the argument Cliff was making. :) :)
  • kryystkryyst Ontario, Canada
    edited Aug 2009
    DocFrazier wrote:
    With my PC, i have the freedom to do what i want, be it change to a different brand of GUP, Motherboard, etc. whenever i want, to upgrade as i please.

    Your right. PC's allow you to spend as much money as you want and as often as you want on eeking out that next 1% speed boost. Hurrah.
    I have the freedom to play just about any game ever made, INCLUDING console games. (Emus are great)

    Now where did I leave that xbox360 or ps3 emu, or working xbox or ps2 emu for that matter....hmmmm yes emu's indeed.
    The multiplayer capacity that exists on a PC system is vastly superior to a console because, if i don't like the douche bags i have to play with on a server, I can get my own server to control and dictate whatever i want.
    No argument there, but then again most consoles allow you to host your own room and invite friends sooooo.......
    With a console, you make a one time investment, (the earlier, the more expencive) you get a non-upgradable unit, which in 3 years TOPs will be outdated and they'll be trying to sell me another one that might not even play the games i already have. so i'll have to buy a whole new unit, probably at an inflated cost compaired to my privious one. I'm limited to the proprietary content that is released for the game system, can't play x-box games on a playstation.

    Difference is that in 3 years the game requirements don't increase for the consoles they stay the same. Your console doesn't need to be upgraded and then even once the 3 year mark hits you can keep your old console as games usually keep coming out for some time. Even then when you do upgrade to your new console as long as you stay in the same brand they've all been backwards compatible for the most part since makers jumped from cart to disk.

    anyway, the point of the article, was to show the decrease in the cost difference between PC and console in the last 6 years.
    Being a computer gamer since i was little(go commodore, woot!) i may be a little bias, but i do enjoy alot of the titles that consoles have to offer. But i sold my 360 to build my game rig because i have so much more versatility with a PC. Period. a console's range of function is nothing compaired to a PC. Computers Win, hands down in my book.

    This isn't an argument of which is more versatile, there's no argument there PC's win. The argument originally put out was the cost of gaming on a PC vs the cost of gaming on a console. Not which one is better for surfing the net.

    While the cost for PC gaming is has significantly dropped, they aren't comparable despite what Cliff's intentions show.
  • ZuntarZuntar North Carolina Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    I say everyone shut up and go play a game, sheesh!! :screwy:
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Also, just to stoke the fire:

    The PS3 runs Yellow Dog Linux and accepts keyboard and mouse inputs. You CAN, in fact, compute on your console. :)
  • KoreishKoreish I'm a penguin, deal with it. KCMO Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Also, just to stoke the fire:

    So can the X-bawx 360.
  • Cliff_ForsterCliff_Forster Baltimore, MD Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Snark, you know as well as I do, that solution is not easily accessible to the masses.
  • SnarkasmSnarkasm Madison, WI Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    That wasn't part of your argument! IT CAN BE DONE.
  • DocFrazierDocFrazier Gladbrook, IA Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    Bah, damn trolls anyway ;)

    PC is better, HANDS DOWN oh wait the important part IMO!! :P

    The article is true in its statement the THE MARGIN OF DIFFERENCE IS CLOSING between PC and Console. As I read it thats what i understood the point to be. Maybe its not quite as close as depicted, but defiantly close enough that if you were going to by the PS3, you couldn wait till the next paycheck and get a Good PC.

    Give it 5 more years and it will probably be cheaper to run a high quality PC game Rig. then to buy a pre-built game console unit. < - Also, all opinion, not factoids.

    and i'm done, but continue on, tis interesting watching the conversation
  • ledbetterledbetter Chattanooga, TN
    edited Aug 2009
    What fire?

    So can my kid's Leapster.
  • ThraxThrax Professional Shill, Pokémaster, Watch Slut, Mumble Hivemind Drone Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    What?
  • ledbetterledbetter Chattanooga, TN
    edited Aug 2009
    Koreish wrote:
    Also, just to stoke the fire:

    So can the X-bawx 360.

    Sorry, forgot the quote! :O
  • djmephdjmeph Detroit Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    I know that this has been said, but I have always felt that it's consoles that have benefited from PC gaming, and not the other way around. When you get a console, games will often push the limitations of the hardware that's available, but once they reach that limit it's dunzo. In the PC gaming market, it's the players that push the hardware industry. If it weren't for that push, consoles wouldn't be have as good or as cheap as they are today. It used to be that a lot of games came out on the PC before it came out on a console. Obviously that isn't true anymore, but PC gaming is just as popular as it's ever been and continues to drive the gaming market. I guarantee if people lose interest in PC gaming, consoles will suffer.
  • Cliff_ForsterCliff_Forster Baltimore, MD Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    djmeph wrote:
    I know that this has been said, but I have always felt that it's consoles that have benefited from PC gaming, and not the other way around. When you get a console, games will often push the limitations of the hardware that's available, but once they reach that limit it's dunzo. In the PC gaming market, it's the players that push the hardware industry. If it weren't for that push, consoles wouldn't be have as good or as cheap as they are today. It used to be that a lot of games came out on the PC before it came out on a console. Obviously that isn't true anymore, but PC gaming is just as popular as it's ever been and continues to drive the gaming market. I guarantee if people lose interest in PC gaming, consoles will suffer.

    That is an interesting point. One of these days I would really like to sit down and write a historical retrospective on the innovations in gaming, a time line of sorts. You are right, in many ways the PC drives that innovation in the console market. 3D graphics technology, online play, in game voice, game mods and content expansions, user created content, all things originally driven by the PC market.
  • djmephdjmeph Detroit Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    That is an interesting point. One of these days I would really like to sit down and write a historical retrospective on the innovations in gaming, a time line of sorts. You are right, in many ways the PC drives that innovation in the console market. 3D graphics technology, online play, in game voice, game mods and content expansions, user created content, all things originally driven by the PC market.

    Exactly, and that makes the argument of value completely moot. The only reason you get more value from console gaming is because of the geeks who buy two or three $500 video cards every six months. Within a couple years those three video cards will be shrunk down into a gaming console and sold for a fraction of the price. The value in console gaming wouldn't exist if it weren't for the competitive nature of the PC gaming market.
  • Cliff_ForsterCliff_Forster Baltimore, MD Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    djmeph wrote:
    Exactly, and that makes the argument of value completely moot. The only reason you get more value from console gaming is because of the geeks who buy two or three $500 video cards every six months. Within a couple years those three video cards will be shrunk down into a gaming console and sold for a fraction of the price. The value in console gaming wouldn't exist if it weren't for the competitive nature of the PC gaming market.

    Part of the point I wanted to make is that the $500 video card is no longer necessary to have a good gaming experience on PC. But from a historical perspective, I think you make a great observation. PC gamers that pour that kind of passion into the technology have historically driven the innovation that eventually spills over into the console market.
  • RyanMMRyanMM Ferndale, MI Icrontian
    edited Aug 2009
    This post nicely sums up one of the things that kills me about PC gaming. The video card manufacturers, ATI, and nVidia need to take their marketing departments into the street and shoot them.

    http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=2133
Sign In or Register to comment.