Console and PC Price to Performance Examination

[TurbulentWinds]

13 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Because I wanted to make up my mind about whether to buy a console or not.

 

Both space shuttles and horses can be used to get from point a to point b.  Therefore, they should be compared:  What brings you cheaper into orbit?

 

Ok, the analogy isn´t too great.  It doesn´t make sense to consider a single, rather irrelevant function of a device that was created for entirely different functions and with versatility in mind with another device that was created solely and specifically for this single purpose and with no versatility to create an artificial comparision between the cost of each device and how well they perform the irrelevant, or, depending on the device, crucial function while ignoring all other functions each of the devices can perform.

 

That is like comparing how well apples perform at yielding orange juice compared to oranges when you squeeze either.  You don´t even care how well that yield tastes.

 

Well, I guess nowadays ppl would be so crazy as to do exactly that, but with apples resulting from heavy gene manipulation of whatever plant they´re made to grow on.  Yeah, apples and oranges can both be used to make juice, therefore they should be compared.

 

The world has gone way more crazy than I thought.

 

This is an abstraction. No real world value in your case.

[JoostinOnline]

58 minutes ago, TurbulentWinds said:

Dude. Why spend so much time on this if you think its useless?

 

I found it useful and both console and computers can be used for gaming. Therefore, they should be compared.

I argued with this guy a few days ago, don't bother.  He's just a kid.

[heimdali]

4 minutes ago, TurbulentWinds said:

This is an abstraction. No real world value in your case.

So you agree that this thread is useless.

 

[heimdali]

Just now, JoostinOnline said:

I argued with this guy a few days ago, don't bother.  He's just a kid.

I guess so, but I keep laughing

 

[TurbulentWinds]

1 hour ago, heimdali said:

So you agree that this thread is useless.

 

It is not useless. Its an abstraction. Abstractions do have real world value. You would be able to understand the value of this thread, had you read the OP. You have been arguing with me about the first half and have ignored the second half where value is added.

[Nedkely]

4 hours ago, MrTiC said:

In a course of 4 years with a starting price tag of 1000$ and 10 Games / year PC is STILL CHEAPER

Console:

399 euro + 4 years of psn/live + 40 games (10/y at 60 euro) = 3.038 euro

Pc:

A do it all machine for 1000 euro + 40 games (10/y at 45 euro) = 2800 euro 

Ive never payed full price for games, always 35-45 euro on kinguin (i never pre order) and not even to mention the INSANE steam sales 

And there are tons of shit a console cant do ... 

In the LONG run pc is always cheaper

 

And no i dont hate consoles

Game sales are not exclusive for steam. 

PS store has a tons of sales each month with additional bonuses for ps plus subscribers. 

Of course why you would mention a 1000$ games giveaway each year from ps plus? 

And why you would not include buying a physical copy of the game new or seconds hand which you could sell away after beating the game. I bought horizon zero dawn for 50 pounds and sold it for 24, can you sell your steam games? 

Aha remind me, what is a price for AC origin on steam? 49.99 pounds, i could buy a physical disc for ps4 for less than that and this from stupid tesco. lol steam sucks. 

"cheap games" right. 

 

[heimdali]

17 hours ago, TurbulentWinds said:

It is not useless. Its an abstraction. Abstractions do have real world value. You would be able to understand the value of this thread, had you read the OP. You have been arguing with me about the first half and have ignored the second half where value is added.

What is this value you have in mind, and what abstractions do you mean?

 

[TurbulentWinds]

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

What is this value you have in mind, and what abstractions do you mean?

 

This shows that the consoles in terms of the actual hardware are better for your money, but in the long run the total platform cost is greater than PC in most cases. This is an abstraction because it does not account for other important parts such as games.

[heimdali]

On 11/10/2017 at 10:46 PM, TurbulentWinds said:

This shows that the consoles in terms of the actual hardware are better for your money, but in the long run the total platform cost is greater than PC in most cases. This is an abstraction because it does not account for other important parts such as games.

It doesn´t show that to me.  It´s ignoring too many things to be a valid comparison, and it makes false assumptions.

 

[TurbulentWinds]

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

It´s ignoring too many things to be a valid comparison

I've told you again and again to point these out.

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

it makes false assumptions.

Show me.

[asus killer]

consoles already have a controller. PC's can do so much more than just playing games (usefull stuff not netflix and youtube). The list of difference goes on and on.

People buy consoles because it's a lot easier to play, just turn on and off. People buy computers because they do much more and get better quality gaming (mouse and keyboard, better graphics,...). I really don't think most people make a choice based on dollars, and you can easily buy a PC for the price of a console. Most people either on PC's or consoles just wanna play, don't have high end rigs, just look at steam data.

My 2 cents.

[TurbulentWinds]

1 hour ago, asus killer said:

consoles already have a controller. PC's can do so much more than just playing games (usefull stuff not netflix and youtube). The list of difference goes on and on.

People buy consoles because it's a lot easier to play, just turn on and off. People buy computers because they do much more and get better quality gaming (mouse and keyboard, better graphics,...). I really don't think most people make a choice based on dollars, and you can easily buy a PC for the price of a console. Most people either on PC's or consoles just wanna play, don't have high end rigs, just look at steam data.

My 2 cents.

Yep. I agree.

[heimdali]

10 hours ago, TurbulentWinds said:

I've told you again and again to point these out.

Show me.

I already did and showed.

 

Add to your list that for a console, you have to have a TV.  I watched a video about the xbox and found you´re supposed to have a 4k TV that supports hdr and preferably has a gaming mode which should make the colours nice and the screen update faster.  The console has no display port connector and only an spdiff connector for the sound.  It doesn´t even support 4k@30Hz, which could be done with HDMI, IIRC --- but that might have been DVI, which it also doesn´t have a connector for.  So to play games on a console, I´d have to buy such a TV plus the console and perhaps another sound system, depending on the quality of the speakers the TV has built in.  That brings up the price to, I guess, at least EUR 1000.  It also tells me that consoles still suffer from the same problem as always: The graphics suck, only in a different way than they used to.

 

So the comparison --- if you can call it that --- is EUR 1000+ for a console that still sucks vs. EUR 4.99 for a windoze 10 license for my computer.  Unfortunately, the games I would like to play are either not available for computers or will present issues because they´re too old and haven´t been updated while the ones for the console are getting updates.  I don´t have room to set up a TV.  Hence I ended up buying nothing.

 

Do the comparison differently, assuming that you already have a suitable TV and a way to have good sound, and it won´t make sense to buy a computer just to play games, but it would make perfect sense to buy a console.

 

Do it differently again, assuming that you don´t have anything, and it comes down to what you want:  only play games or have a computer.  If you want to play games, you´re much better off with the console and a TV; if you want a computer, you´d buy the one you want and a monitor; if you want both, you´d buy a console, a computer and a TV that can be used as monitor, or both a TV and a monitor.

 

As I said, the comparision you´re trying uses false assumptions and is flawed.  In case you can´t afford what you want, it is reasonable to assume that you do not have the extra money over a console you´re assuming a computer will cost you to begin with, and your comparison still doesn´t work because you´ll just have to buy the console anyway.  In case you can afford what you want, money isn´t an issue because you may find you´re better off spending it on something you like rather than having it sit in your bank account or under your pillow for nothing until you either eventually die without having had fun, or until the government decides to take it away, or inflation makes it worthless.  In that case, your comparison doesn´t work, either.

 

At least this is a good example of how useless it is to compare apples and oranges

 

[TurbulentWinds]

40 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Do the comparison differently, assuming that you already have a suitable TV and a way to have good sound,

I am assuming this.

41 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Add to your list that for a console, you have to have a TV.  I watched a video about the xbox and found you´re supposed to have a 4k TV that supports hdr and preferably has a gaming mode which should make the colours nice and the screen update faster.  The console has no display port connector and only an spdiff connector for the sound.  It doesn´t even support 4k@30Hz, which could be done with HDMI, IIRC --- but that might have been DVI, which it also doesn´t have a connector for.  So to play games on a console, I´d have to buy such a TV plus the console and perhaps another sound system, depending on the quality of the speakers the TV has built in.  That brings up the price to, I guess, at least EUR 1000.  It also tells me that consoles still suffer from the same problem as always: The graphics suck, only in a different way than they used to.

Someone else already provided far better points for me not including the TV. Most people already have one, therefore I am not gonna included it. If you want to see the rest of their points, check out the other posts.

42 minutes ago, heimdali said:

So the comparison --- if you can call it that --- is EUR 1000+ for a console that still sucks vs. EUR 4.99 for a windoze 10 license for my computer.  Unfortunately, the games I would like to play are either not available for computers or will present issues because they´re too old and haven´t been updated while the ones for the console are getting updates.  I don´t have room to set up a TV.  Hence I ended up buying nothing

Ok? Does not really have anything to do with this. I can't objectively measure personal preference in games.

43 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Do the comparison differently, assuming that you already have a suitable TV and a way to have good sound, and it won´t make sense to buy a computer just to play games, but it would make perfect sense to buy a console.

Dude, will you ever read the OP? It's not just about up front costs. It's also about online play and such like.

44 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Do it differently again, assuming that you don´t have anything, and it comes down to what you want:  only play games or have a computer.  If you want to play games, you´re much better off with the console and a TV; if you want a computer, you´d buy the one you want and a monitor; if you want both, you´d buy a console, a computer and a TV that can be used as monitor, or both a TV and a monitor.

Exactly. When the costs are the same, it is personal preference.

45 minutes ago, heimdali said:

As I said, the comparision you´re trying uses false assumptions and is flawed.

Ok?? I don't see anything here that I have already gone over.

46 minutes ago, heimdali said:

In case you can´t afford what you want, it is reasonable to assume that you do not have the extra money over a console you´re assuming a computer will cost you to begin with,

I agree. This is not about what to buy. This is about total platform cost. Overall. Over a certain number of years. I agree. Up front consoles are cheaper as I stated. If you are planning on playing for years, after a certain point, a PC becomes more cost effective.

48 minutes ago, heimdali said:

and your comparison still doesn´t work because you´ll just have to buy the console anyway

Yep. Never said you couldn't. Just a look at platform cost. Not about the amount of money in your pocket at the time you want to purchase.

49 minutes ago, heimdali said:

In case you can afford what you want, money isn´t an issue because you may find you´re better off spending it on something you like

Yep. I agree. Do what makes you happy. This is not about what to buy. It's just a look at platform cost over a certain number of years. I was interested so I decided to take a little peek at it and share what I found.

50 minutes ago, heimdali said:

than having it sit in your bank account or under your pillow for nothing until you either eventually die without having had fun, or until the government decides to take it away, or inflation makes it worthless. 

Isn't that happy?

51 minutes ago, heimdali said:

In that case, your comparison doesn´t work, either.

This is not a comparison of what to buy. That's personal. This is comparing total platform costs over a certain period of time with certain factors at play or not at play.

52 minutes ago, heimdali said:

At least this is a good example of how useless it is to compare apples and oranges

I'm comparing dollars to dollars. How is this apple to orange?

[tatte]

This sort of comparison only works for the 14yo kids we have here, both in the financial and "x is better than y" regard. Growing up solves so many problems...

[SoloDolo]

On 11/9/2017 at 4:15 PM, MrTiC said:

In a course of 4 years with a starting price tag of 1000$ and 10 Games / year PC is STILL CHEAPER

Console:

399 euro + 4 years of psn/live + 40 games (10/y at 60 euro) = 3.038 euro

Pc:

A do it all machine for 1000 euro + 40 games (10/y at 45 euro) = 2800 euro 

Ive never payed full price for games, always 35-45 euro on kinguin (i never pre order) and not even to mention the INSANE steam sales 

And there are tons of shit a console cant do ... 

In the LONG run pc is always cheaper

 

And no i dont hate consoles

You can get great deals on Console games also. PS store has sales, best buy and gamestop have sales for holiday. 

 

In the long run PC is not even close to "always cheaper". It can be cheaper if you dont upgrade often.  Consoles can be cheap if you shop around for deals and wait for prices to drop on Amazon. Its really not rocket science. 

[TurbulentWinds]

19 hours ago, tatte said:

This sort of comparison only works for the 14yo kids we have here, both in the financial and "x is better than y" regard. Growing up solves so many problems...

Yep. Pretty much only applies to us middle school and high school (at least the lazy ones) students.

[heimdali]

On 11/13/2017 at 11:01 PM, TurbulentWinds said:

Yep. Pretty much only applies to us middle school and high school (at least the lazy ones) students.

Well, you might figure it out eventually ...

 

[TurbulentWinds]

Just now, heimdali said:

Well, you might figure it out eventually ...

 

What? I'm confused as to what you mean by this.

[heimdali]

3 minutes ago, TurbulentWinds said:

What? I'm confused as to what you mean by this.

That´s ok, you´ll figure it out eventually

 

[TurbulentWinds]

1 minute ago, heimdali said:

That´s ok, you´ll figure it out eventually

 

I think you are talking about not being lazy. I got way too many essays to ignore till the last minute to have time for work.

[heimdali]

1 minute ago, TurbulentWinds said:

I think you are talking about not being lazy. I got way too many essays to ignore till the last minute to have time for work.

Ignoring essays doesn´t give you any more time, no matter how long you do that.

 

[TurbulentWinds]

Just now, heimdali said:

Ignoring essays doesn´t give you any more time, no matter how long you do that.

 

It gives me more time to help correct my classmates. Legitimately, the only reason I ignore my own is because I spend too much time editing my friends. I edit for about like 10 people a day and talk to you in between 

[heimdali]

2 minutes ago, TurbulentWinds said:

It gives me more time to help correct my classmates. Legitimately, the only reason I ignore my own is because I spend too much time editing my friends. I edit for about like 10 people a day and talk to you in between 

You still have only as much time as you have.

 

[TurbulentWinds]

2 minutes ago, heimdali said:

You still have only as much time as you have.

 

Time is subjective because of general relativity. 

 

I'm not trying to piss you off, I'm just kidding around.